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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful context: it searches only FirmTape's public pages and finished sessions, ranks by keyword, and returns ids rather than data. This goes well beyond the annotation baseline.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, return contract, date behavior, alternatives, exclusions, and scope limits. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and uses compact, scannable sentences.

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 search tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description fully covers what is searched, what is returned, how dates behave, when to use alternatives, and what the tool does not cover. Nothing critical 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the query parameter is described as 'A topic, a question, or a trading date.' The description adds concrete value with date format examples and explains how a date maps to session(s), which improves the agent's ability to formulate valid queries.

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 names a specific verb and resource: search FirmTape for SPX dealer positioning documents. It also enumerates the exact content types searched and states it returns ids for fetch, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_sessions and get_session.

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 tells agents when to prefer structured tools (list_sessions, get_session, get_levels, etc.) and gives direct exclusions: don't use it for fetching by id or for a measurement with a known date. This is exemplary routing guidance.

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