verify_brand_attestation

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint. Description adds key behavioral details: graceful degradation to verified=false on error, stable response shape, and the return fields. No contradiction.

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 well-structured sentences, front-loaded with action and return shape. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 tool with one parameter, good annotations, and no output schema, the description fully explains the return fields, error behavior, and usage context. Agent has all needed information.

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?

Only one parameter (brandSlug) with schema coverage 0%. The description does not elaborate on the parameter meaning beyond the usage context, but the schema provides a regex pattern and length constraints. The description implies the brandSlug comes from find_inventory, which adds some value.

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 identifies the action ('Resolve the standalone droplinked brand attestation'), the resource ('for a single shop slug'), and distinguishes from siblings by specifying it is used AFTER find_inventory.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use this AFTER find_inventory to round-trip a brand slug and render the canonical trust row to the buyer before proceeding.' Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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