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

With no annotations available, the description carries the behavioral burden. It meaningfully discloses case-insensitive matching, matching against any cell, and the 50-row limit—details not fully present in the schema. It omits result ordering and pagination, but covers the core behavior well for a simple 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 a single front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It efficiently communicates the dataset, search condition, case-insensitivity, and result cap in minimal space.

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 two-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description conveys the essential operation. Missing details such as the default limit when the parameter is omitted, result ordering, and the exact shape of returned rows keep it from being fully complete for an autonomous agent.

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 50% because only query has a description. The description indirectly explains limit via 'up to 50' and clarifies that query is searched in cells. However, it does not explicitly define default limit behavior or fully compensate for the undocumented limit parameter.

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 is specific and action-oriented: it explains that the tool returns rows from the Extinvo dataset matching the query in any cell, is case-insensitive, and caps results at 50. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like dataset_row or dataset_stats, which serve different purposes.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools. It does not mention alternatives, exclusions, or preferred scenarios. While the name implies content search, the description never tells the agent how it relates to dataset_row, dataset_top, or other siblings.

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