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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context about the returned content: capabilities, limitations, prompt guidance, and an example.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the imperative 'Read this BEFORE...' and then compactly explains what is returned and why it matters. Every sentence contributes useful information 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only guide with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it says when to use it, what it returns, and the practical benefit for prompt writing.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are inherently simple. The empty schema is sufficient and the description does not need to explain parameter usage.

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?

The description states a specific resource and purpose: a guide that returns what Dolphin's builder can and cannot create, plus prompt wording and an example. It is clearly distinct from the trading/data-action siblings by being a prerequisite guide for prompt writing.

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?

It gives explicit timing: 'Read this BEFORE writing a prompt for Dolphin's build chat' and includes the target URL. It does not name a when-not case or an alternative, but no plausible sibling alternative exists for this guide.

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