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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully carries the burden. It mentions search by name and optional filters, but does not disclose rate limits, result format, pagination, authentication needs, or behavior when no results are found. The parameter 'limit' (max 20) is only in the schema.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus an example. It front-loads the action, wastes no words, and 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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is brief. It does not explain the structure of results (e.g., list of advertisers, fields), pagination, or error conditions. The hint to use get_advertiser_profile partially compensates, but more detail would be helpful for an agent.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats the filter categories (genre, region, platform) but does not add substantial meaning beyond what the schema provides. The mention of using the returned advertiser_id is context for the output, not parameters.

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?

Clearly states it searches for advertisers, game studios, or mobile games by name and optional filters. Distinguishes from sibling tools like search_creatives (searches creatives) and get_advertiser_profile (retrieves details for a given ID), with a hint to use the returned ID with that tool.

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?

Provides an example query and suggests using the returned advertiser_id with get_advertiser_profile, but does not explicitly state when this tool is preferred over siblings or when not to use it (e.g., for creative searches use search_creatives).

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