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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope information beyond that: answers are the officially published ones, and each result carries the page where it appears, plus the pagination model (limit plus nextCursor). It does not mention rate limits or auth, but for a read-only lookup that is minor.

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?

Two dense sentences with zero filler: the first establishes what is returned and its scope, the second covers filtering and pagination. Content is front-loaded and nothing is repeated.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain return shapes, and it still notes that each answer includes its source page. Combined with the annotation-covered safety profile, an agent has what it needs to invoke the tool correctly; only the sibling-routing question is left open.

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 all three parameters (limit, query, cursor) are already documented in the schema. The description restates the query-as-topic filter and the cursor-based paging but adds no semantics beyond what the schema provides, 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 and resource: returns official evoost.ai FAQ answers, with the enumerated topic areas (data ownership, CRM integration, sales team role, markets, data protection) and the accompanying source page. This clearly separates it from generic search_site, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Explains how to use the optional query filter and how to page with limit/nextCursor, which implies the retrieval workflow. However, it never says when to use this curated FAQ instead of search_site or get_company_overview, and there are no exclusions or prerequisites.

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