Mock Call

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds important behavior beyond annotations: no credentials needed, no datastore touched, returns the exact shape the live API would, and the `error: true` flag reveals the error response shape. This is rich, non-redundant 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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then examples, behavior, usage, and the path-omission trick. Slightly repetitive with the schema's parameter descriptions, but every sentence is otherwise useful and the structure is logical.

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 2-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, usage context, behavioral guarantees (no datastore, no credentials), error-shape option, and listing behavior. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains both parameters fully. The description repeats the path examples and omit-to-list behavior, adding no syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides. 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?

States a specific verb ('Get a schema-accurate EXAMPLE response') and resource ('any API endpoint'), and immediately distinguishes itself from all sibling tools by noting it requires NO credentials and touches no datastore. The agent can tell this is a mock/example tool, not a real API operation.

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 says to use it 'to learn/verify response shapes before wiring up real or sandbox keys,' and explains how to list all mockable endpoints by omitting `path`. It does not name specific alternative tools or say when not to use it, 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.