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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses search scope, return format, and tenant-awareness, which is useful. However, it lacks behavioral details such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements.

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 five sentences, each front-loaded with distinct information: core purpose, search scope, return format, tenant-awareness, and filter options. No sentence is redundant or wasteful.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description provides return format and tenant-awareness, which is helpful. However, it omits guidance on the 'limit' parameter, pagination, and when to prefer this tool over alternatives, leaving clear gaps for a 5-parameter tool.

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% (high), so the baseline is 3. The description mentions the optional filters (category, difficulty, max duration) but adds no syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Search' and resource 'Show Me Step by Step tutorial corpus', and clarifies the scope ('titles, descriptions, and step content'). It also states the return format ('slim summaries with TL;DRs and canonical URLs'), which helps distinguish it from list-based siblings like list_tutorials_by_category.

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 implies usage via 'by free-text query' and mentions optional filters, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_tutorials_by_category or get_tutorial. No when-not-to-use or alternative routing is provided.

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