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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value the annotations cannot: the return shape is "the most relevant passages with their source page," which tells the agent results are excerpts, not whole documents, and are attributable.

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, front-loaded with the action and corpus, followed by the usage trigger and return format. No filler or restatement of the title.

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 one-parameter, closed-world, read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers what it searches, when to reach for it, and what comes back. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

With 100% schema coverage on a single required parameter, the schema already explains what to pass. The description's only hint is that queries are for "how something works," which mildly frames query formulation but adds little beyond the schema's "in plain words."

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Search the Fetch Hive help docs") and narrows the content type to how a feature, step type or app works. The named corpus distinguishes it from siblings like search_actions or search_prompts, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

"Use it before guessing how something behaves" is a clear, actionable usage trigger that tells the agent this is the preferred source over inference. It does not name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, so it falls short of full routing guidance.

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