Compare audited opportunities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating safe, idempotent operation. The description adds that the comparison is 'compact' and 'consistently shaped' and that it does not generate sales copy, but this is minimal additional behavioral context.

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 a single, clear, and concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the core purpose and is appropriately sized.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description fails to explain the input parameters, which have no descriptions in the schema. With sibling tools that have similar inputs, more context is needed to ensure correct invocation.

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 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions in the schema. The description does not mention any parameters or explain what opportunityIds or serviceIds represent. This is a critical gap for effective tool use.

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 clearly states the tool returns a comparison of saved audit snapshots, with a specific verb 'returns' and resource 'saved audit snapshots'. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like opportunity_discover or opportunity_audit, but the operation is distinct enough to be understood.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like opportunity_discover or opportunity_audit. No exclusions or context for use are mentioned.

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