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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful non-obvious behavior: the poster is delivered as a print-ready digital file, nothing is physically posted, and the search returns matching handles, prices, and product pages. This is consistent with the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false annotations.

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 four dense sentences that front-load the action and the return value. The second sentence is information-heavy, but each clause contributes product context, delivery behavior, or filtering guidance, with no filler.

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 filtered-search tool with no output schema, the description covers what is searched, what is returned, and the recommended next step. It does not state behavior when no filters are supplied or whether pagination exists, but those are minor given the search semantics are otherwise clear and no parameters are required.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description does add meaning for edition (choose by recipient's location) and occasion (which occasions are milestone-bound), but it leaves year and buyer_country semantics to the schema and does not explain the no-filter case.

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 opens with a specific action: 'Search GiftsToPrint's personalised newspaper-style posters', and names what is returned (handle, prices, product page). It also distinguishes this tool from the sibling get_poster_form by positioning that tool as the next step rather than the search itself.

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 explains when each poster type applies (birthday and wedding-anniversary posters are milestone- and edition-specific; retirement and dating-anniversary posters cover any year) and gives a selection rule for the edition based on where the recipient lives or grew up. It also explicitly names get_poster_form as the next step, though it does not state when not to use this tool relative to create_poster_checkout or upload_photo.

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