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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries a lower burden. It adds valuable context about the X-API-KEY authentication header (instead of Bearer), and explains that it returns summary-level info and recommends GetEndpointDetail for full schemas.

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?

The description is four sentences, each serving a purpose: what it does, when to use it, what it returns, and an important authentication note. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no wasted words.

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 one-parameter search tool, it covers the use case, return format, follow-up step, and critical authentication detail. It lacks mention of result limits or error behavior, but given the simplicity and the absence of an output schema, it is reasonably complete.

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% and the query parameter is well-described with examples in the schema itself. The description repeats similar examples but does not add new meaning or clarify formatting beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states that the tool searches Secureship API documentation and returns matching endpoints with method, path, summary, and tags. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on task-specific search rather than listing all endpoints or retrieving details.

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 explicitly says 'Use when you need to find endpoints for a specific task' and directs follow-up to GetEndpointDetail for full parameter schemas. However, it does not explicitly name when not to use ListEndpoints or GetAuthInfo, so a clear alternative/exclusion is missing.

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