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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Show' implies a read-only operation and 'plan' suggests a returned artifact rather than raw results, but the description does not state whether the search is executed, what 'normalized' means, or what the response contains.

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 a single focused sentence with no filler. The verb and resource are front-loaded, and the length is appropriate for a tool with one parameter.

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?

Despite the simple one-parameter surface, the description leaves important context undefined: what a 'normalized local search plan' is, how the query should be phrased, and what the output looks like. Combined with the absence of annotations and output schema, this is not enough for an agent to confidently invoke the tool.

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 0%, and the description adds only 'for a query,' which essentially restates the parameter name. It does not clarify the expected query format, scope, or constraints, so it adds little meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show') and names a distinct resource ('normalized local search plan'), which separates it from the sibling search tools at a high level. However, the phrase 'normalized local search plan' is jargon and is not explained, so an agent may not know exactly what artifact is returned.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use search_plan versus the sibling tools search_web, search_sources, or fetch_page. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative-routing hints.

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