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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It states 'provides information,' implying a read-only operation with no side effects. While it doesn't explicitly say 'read-only' or mention limitations like rate limits, the intent is clear enough for a search tool.

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 two concise sentences with no unnecessary detail. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and use case, adhering to ideal structure.

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?

The description sufficiently explains what the tool does and when to use it, given the lack of an output schema. It doesn't delve into handling of complex nested options, but the schema covers those. Overall, it is complete for the tool's intended function.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both 'query' and 'ai_search_options'. However, these descriptions are minimal ('The input query.' and 'Options for customizing the AI search behavior.'). The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameters, so it stays at the baseline.

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 clearly states that the tool provides authoritative information about Develust Technology's services, listing specific domains like web development and consulting. This distinguishes it from generic search tools and makes its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly instructs to use this tool for questions about Develust's expertise, services, project capabilities, or engagement. This provides direct guidance on when to invoke it, even though no sibling tools are present.

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