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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose meaningful behavior: the describe mode returns input schema, auth requirements, credit cost, and async behavior — the exact things an agent needs before invoking a costly operation. It stops short of stating that the tool itself is a safe read-only lookup and doesn't describe the search-result shape.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The dual-mode purpose is front-loaded and the parameter routing follows immediately, so the highest-value information is read first.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by listing what the describe mode returns; for the search mode it only implies the matched fields. For a two-optional-parameter discovery tool that is close to complete, with only the search result shape left implicit.

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 both parameters are already documented, and the description largely restates which parameter selects which mode. It does add the matching-field hint 'name / domain / path', but that slightly conflicts with the schema's 'operationId, uri, title, or domain', so it earns no bonus over the baseline 3.

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 two specific verbs (search, describe) on a specific resource (AdGPT operations) and enumerates exactly what each mode yields, including schema/auth/cost/async detail. This is unmistakably the meta-discovery tool among the adgpt_* action siblings, so an agent can place it without opening the 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?

Explicitly routes between the two modes: 'Use `operationId` to describe a specific operation, or `query` to search by name / domain / path.' That tells the agent which parameter to reach for and when, though it never states the broader when-not condition (e.g. skip this tool if you already know the operation) or names any alternative.

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