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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and scope are covered structurally. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: the catalog contains 35 resources, the tool is free, and no payment is needed to list them.

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 what the tool does and how to use it in the workflow. The category list is dense but useful for an agent scanning the catalog scope, and there is no redundant or filler text.

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 read-only catalog tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the return fields, total resource count, category coverage, cost, and the follow-up workflow with sibling tools.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both optional parameters are already well documented. The description lists the categories in prose, which reinforces the category enum, but it does not add syntax or filtering semantics beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 verb and resource: it lists Wafermap's pay-per-call resources and names the returned fields (id, name, category, USD price, summary). It also distinguishes this catalog tool from the sibling workflow tools by positioning it as the first step before wafermap_resource_schema and wafermap_call.

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 explicitly says to use this tool first to find the right resource id, then read the schema with wafermap_resource_schema, then invoke wafermap_call. That gives clear sequencing and names the relevant alternatives for subsequent steps.

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