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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context about scope (signed-in host) and data boundaries, without contradicting annotations. Minor gaps like ordering or pagination are not critical for this simple read-only 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the operation, scope, and returned fields without wasted words. The 'No guest data' exclusion is concise and valuable.

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 listing tool with one optional parameter, the description is complete: it names the resource, scope, included fields, and exclusion. The output schema is absent, but the description enumerates the return fields sufficiently, and annotations cover behavioral safety.

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?

The schema fully documents the single optional includeArchived parameter with its default and meaning, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description adds no extra parameter-level semantics, but the high schema coverage keeps this at baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('signed-in host's properties') and enumerates the returned fields. It also draws a clear boundary with 'No guest data,' distinguishing it from guest-related sibling tools.

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 description clearly establishes when to use the tool: to list the signed-in host's properties. The explicit 'No guest data' note provides a useful when-not signal, though it does not name alternative sibling tools for guest-specific operations.

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