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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful cost context ('free') and paging behavior via the cursor, though it does not mention rate limits or auth requirements. Given the lower bar with annotations, this is strong but not maximal.

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 tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by paging and the sibling alternative. No filler or repetition.

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 read-only paged list tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers what is returned ('creators already delivered'), how to page, and when to use the alternative. It could be slightly clearer about the cursor naming mismatch, but nothing essential 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 67%, putting the baseline at 3. The description hints at paging but calls the value 'next_cursor' while the actual parameter is named 'cursor', and the limit parameter remains undocumented. It adds little meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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: reading creators already delivered by earlier searches. It explicitly distinguishes itself from load_more_results, which retrieves new creators, so an agent can choose between them without opening schemas.

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?

Names the exact alternative tool and the condition for using it: 'To get new creators beyond those already delivered, use load_more_results.' It also implies the search_id source ('one of the user's earlier searches') and explains paging via the cursor.

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