paydirt_get_summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so bar is lower. The description adds that the summary is supplementary and not the source of truth, which is important context about reliability. This goes beyond structured hints.

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?

Two concise sentences. Front-loaded with usage trigger, immediately answers when to use. No wasted words.

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 simple read-only summary tool with all parameters schema-described and an output schema present, the description sufficiently covers purpose, usage, and trust caveat. Nothing material is missing.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool's description adds no parameter-specific meaning; it doesn't mention days, form_id, or app_id. Baseline 3 is 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 clearly states the tool produces an aggregate AI summary of recent Paydirt responses, using a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like paydirt_get_responses, relying on the word 'summary' to differentiate.

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?

Provides explicit trigger condition ('when the user asks for an aggregate AI summary') and clarifies that raw Q&A are the source of truth, implying to use raw response tools for detailed data. It doesn't name the alternative tool, so not a 5.

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