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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds a unique behavioral detail: 'Works without a connected account,' which informs the agent that no authentication or account setup is required. This is valuable context beyond what annotations provide, though it stops short of describing output structure (which an output schema likely covers).

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 sentences, immediately front-loads the verb and object ('Search the Dreambooth Studio documentation and FAQ'), and then adds essential usage guidance. No wasted words; every clause contributes to understanding when and how to use the tool.

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 documentation search tool with a complete input schema and an output schema present, the description fully covers its purpose, usage context, and an important behavioral nuance (no account needed). It is complete and self-contained.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (query, limit, locale). The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already states. Per the calibration baseline, a score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the verb 'Search' and the specific resource: 'Dreambooth Studio documentation and FAQ.' It also lists the exact topics covered, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on accounts and project data. The purpose is unambiguous and highly specific.

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 explicitly instructs when to use this tool: 'Call this before answering any question about the product, pricing, packages, hardware, printing, subscriptions, or troubleshooting.' It also provides a clear behavioral directive: 'answer from the docs rather than from memory.' This goes beyond simple context and gives actionable guidance.

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