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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds real context beyond them: results are limited to 'published' vessels, and pricing/availability come with caveats (consistent with the schema's 'starting weekly rate, not a guest-specific quote'). It stops short of describing pagination or result caps.

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, no filler, with the search scope front-loaded ahead of the caveat about returned data. Every clause 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?

With no output schema, the description correctly flags that returned pricing and availability carry caveats, which is the main thing an agent needs to avoid misreading results. It is slightly incomplete on result volume/pagination and on how the optional filters combine.

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 80%, so the schema already documents guests, bestFor, maxRate and activity in detail. The description restates those filter axes ('starting budget, capacity, activity or travel style') without adding syntax, units or defaults, and minCabins is documented in neither place.

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 a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('published crewed-yacht catalog') plus the filter dimensions it accepts (budget, capacity, activity, travel style). It implies a broad catalog search distinct from the single-yacht siblings, but never names get_yacht or check_dream_on_availability, so the differentiation must be inferred.

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?

Usage is implied by 'Search the published crewed-yacht catalog' — an agent can infer this is the entry point before drilling into a specific yacht. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus get_yacht or check_dream_on_availability, and no statement of prerequisites or result limits.

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