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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds meaningful context: the search is FREE, scoped to the public Bazaar, capped by MAX_PRICE_USD, and it caches matches. It does not describe return shape or freshness, but the caching side effect is explicitly disclosed.

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 dense, purposeful sentences with no filler. It front-loads the free/public search scope, then gives routing guidance and follow-up actions. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description is sufficient for correct selection and invocation given only two parameters and a fully documented schema. The main gap is that no output schema exists and the description does not describe the result structure, though 'cache matches' implies a list of matches.

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 already documents both query and limit thoroughly. The description adds context that query is 'keyword/semantic', but does not materially improve on the schema for parameter semantics.

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 and resource: 'Keyword/semantic search of the public Coinbase x402 Bazaar (Base, ≤ MAX_PRICE_USD)'. It also names the exact siblings it should not be confused with, making the tool's role unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly says to prefer this tool over quote_route when browsing by query text rather than ranked task routing, and over list_discovered_apis when refreshing from the live catalog. It even tells the agent what to do next with call_x402_api or route_and_call.

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