List tips awaiting moderation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful state context (these tips are pre-approval), but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or volume limits for a potentially unbounded list.

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?

One sentence with zero filler, and the distinguishing scope qualifier is included up front rather than buried.

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 optional-parameter read-only list with no output schema, the description conveys the essential purpose but omits anything about result shape or pagination, leaving mild gaps for an agent that needs to iterate results.

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% and the single 'channel' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including fallback behavior. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (tips), plus the qualifying state (held for moderation before being shown on stream), which meaningfully separates it from the sibling tips_list. It does not explicitly name the sibling, but the scope qualifier does the distinguishing work.

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 phrase 'held for moderation before they are shown on stream' implies the usage context (reviewing pending tips), but gives no explicit when-to-use, prerequisites, or pointer to alternatives like tips_list for non-pending tips.

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