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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is not the description's burden. The description still adds genuinely new context: no authentication is required, and the tool is meant to precede execute as a lookup step. It stops short of saying anything about result size or how the 'detail' setting changes output.

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?

Three short sentences with zero filler, front-loading what is searched before moving to usage order, the alternative route, and the auth note. Every sentence carries a distinct piece of information.

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 read-only, three-parameter lookup tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the definition supplies purpose, ordering, alternative routing and auth status — enough to call it correctly. The only omission is any hint about result volume or how to interpret the returned reference snippets.

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% and two parameters carry enums, so query, language and detail are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional meaning about the language enum or what 'default' versus 'verbose' detail actually yields, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Search the Dodo Payments SDK reference') and narrows the scope to 'methods, parameters and examples', which an agent can immediately distinguish from a general docs search. It also names the sibling it is not (search_docs) for the guides/concepts case.

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?

Gives explicit sequencing guidance ('Call it before execute') and a concrete trigger ('when you need the exact SDK method for your code'), plus a named alternative for a different intent ('For guides and concepts, use search_docs'). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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