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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description itself adds no behavioral context such as pagination, truncation, case sensitivity, or record limits; these details reside in the schema's criteria parameter description, which is structured data and not credited here.

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 that states the tool's purpose without redundancy. It front-loads the action and resource, leaving detailed parameter semantics to the schema. 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?

Given the rich schema documentation for the criteria parameter and the presence of annotations, the minimal description is adequate but not complete. It does not explicitly state that the tool returns a pageable list of tax rate records, though this is implied by the name and elaborated in the schema. With no output schema, some return-format clarity from the description would help.

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 'company' and 'criteria' are already well documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning. Per the baseline rule for high schema coverage, a score of 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 states a clear verb ('Search') and resource ('tax rate records') within the QuickBooks Online context. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_tax_agencies and search_tax_codes by naming the specific record type, though it does not explicitly contrast with get_tax_rate or other search tools.

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?

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer search_tax_rates over get_tax_rate, nor does it note any exclusions or prerequisites. The detailed criteria description is operational, not tool-selection guidance.

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