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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a useful behavioral detail: it returns CSV with a specific column set, and it indicates filters are optional. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 short sentences place the core action first and then list the return format. Every sentence adds value, with no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

For a simple optional-filter list tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states the resource, the optional filters, and the exact CSV columns. No required parameters or nested objects increase complexity, and annotations cover the safety profile.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The phrase 'and/or' adds the minor insight that query and sector can be combined, but the description otherwise repeats schema content. No enums or nested objects require additional explanation.

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 opens with a specific action and resource: 'List available CSE symbols with metadata.' This clearly distinguishes it from data-series siblings like get_ohlc_data, get_indices, and get_announcements. The optional search terms add useful filter context without creating ambiguity.

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 when-to-use guidance or exclusions are given. The description only states what the tool does and that filters are optional, leaving an agent to infer when to choose get_symbols over screen_stocks or get_indices. This is effectively no guidance about alternatives.

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