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

Annotations already establish a safe read-only, non-destructive operation, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the default result set is scoped to stores with deals in the last 7 days and the store population exceeds 1000. It does not mention pagination or result limits, which matters at that scale.

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 tight sentences with no filler, front-loading what the tool returns before the conditional behavior. Every clause carries actionable information.

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?

An output schema exists so return shape need not be explained, and the description covers default scoping, query semantics, and catalog size. The one remaining gap is how to page or retrieve beyond the default/limited result set given 1000+ stores.

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?

With 100% schema coverage the baseline is 3, and the description goes further by explaining that `query` is a partial name match and that its presence/absence changes the result set entirely. That meaning exceeds the schema's 'Part of the store name' text.

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+resource (list stores) and adds what the result contains (name and slug) plus the downstream tools it feeds (search_deals, list_store_coupons). It does not contrast with the similarly named sibling list_coupon_stores, so an agent must infer that difference.

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?

Gives an explicit use rule: omit `query` for stores with deals in the last 7 days, pass `query` to locate any of the 1000+ stores by name. It lacks any exclusion or comparison against sibling listers such as list_coupon_stores, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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