getLatestCrowdfundingCampaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results include financial details and offering terms, hinting at payload content, but says nothing about ordering, recency window, or pagination behavior beyond what the schema states.

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 first sentence is front-loaded and useful. The second sentence is marketing padding ("Stay informed on...") that mostly restates the purpose without adding operational detail, so roughly half the text does not earn its place.

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 two-parameter read endpoint with full schema coverage and no output schema, the essential information is present. What is missing is how results are ordered or bounded in time, which matters for a "latest" endpoint and is not covered by the annotations or schema.

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%, with both page and limit documented including defaults and the 1000 max. The description contributes no additional meaning about how paging interacts with recency, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

"Discover the most recent crowdfunding campaigns" gives a specific verb plus resource, and the recency emphasis implicitly separates it from searchCrowdfundingCampaigns and getCrowdfundingCampaignsByCIK. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so an agent must infer the distinction from the tool names alone.

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?

There is no statement of when to pick this over searchCrowdfundingCampaigns or getCrowdfundingCampaignsByCIK, nor any exclusion or prerequisite. "Stay informed on which companies and projects are actively raising funds" is promotional framing rather than actionable routing guidance.

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