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

With empty annotations the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the notification channel (email), a per-user quota ('Up to 10 alerts per user'), the temporal scope ('Only affects ads posted after the alert is created'), and the matching rule. These are non-obvious behaviors an agent could not infer from 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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and trigger, followed by matching semantics, requirements, and limits in descending order of importance. No sentence is filler.

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 two-parameter create tool with no output schema and no annotations, the definition covers purpose, matching logic, quota, and temporal behavior adequately. It omits what the call returns (e.g., an alert identifier) and whether re-creating an identical alert duplicates or replaces one, which would matter for follow-up calls.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: keywords are conjunctive ('Every keyword must appear') and must match in the ad's title or description, which the schema does not specify. It also clarifies that keywords and category are combinable with 'and/or'.

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?

The description states a specific verb (create) and resource (alert) plus the exact trigger condition: the user is emailed when a wanted ad matches their keywords/category. It is unmistakably the creation counterpart to siblings like delete_alert and list_alerts, so an agent can route it without opening any 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?

It gives clear audience context ('for sellers who want to hear about demand for what they have') and the eligibility condition ('Needs at least keywords or a category'), which tells the agent when the tool is callable. It does not name alternatives such as search_wants for one-off searches or delete_alert for removal, and states no when-not-to-use case.

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