Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description only mentions data source (verified receipt attestations) but lacks details on side effects, authentication, rate limits, or behavior when no data is available. With no annotations, the description should disclose more operational traits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, each adding value: first states action, second lists outputs, third specifies data source. Very efficient with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Describes outputs adequately but omits return format, pagination, or any edge cases. Given no output schema and no params, a bit more detail on result structure would improve completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameters exist in the input schema (0 params, 100% coverage). The description does not need to add parameter info, and the baseline of 4 is appropriate given no work needed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it returns aggregated merchant and category distribution across verified spends, listing specific outputs (top store brands, category breakdown, concentration metrics). This differentiates it from sibling tools like get-spend-distribution or get-protocol-summary.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get-spend-distribution, get-settlement-summary). The description implies it's for merchant-level analysis but does not explicitly state conditions or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.