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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only/idempotent profile, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: the first call (no cursor) returns available_values with valid filter values, clarifying the pagination/initialization flow. It stops short of describing result shape, but the output schema covers that.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences: filtering dimensions, selection scenarios, and the initial-call/alternative guidance. No sentence is wasted and the most decision-relevant information leads.

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?

With an output schema covering return values and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies what's left: the attribute-matching model, the initial available_values behavior, and routing to the free-form sibling. Nothing needed to call it correctly 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the 10 parameters including exact-value and substring-match conventions. The description restates the filter set without adding syntax or edge-case detail beyond the schema, so the 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 (List) and resource (offers) plus the filtering dimensions (flower, colour, occasion, shop, price, delivery), and explicitly routes free-form queries to search_flower_offers. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like get_flower_offer and match_bouquet_photo without opening a schema.

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 concrete when-to-use examples ("what does shop X have", "cheapest tulips", paging) and names the alternative for free-form wishes. The condition that selects search_flower_offers over this tool is stated explicitly.

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