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

Annotations already indicate the operation is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: the response contains both service-level and plan-level objects, and the agent should not silently choose the cheapest plan.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and remains dense but organized. The workflow note and get_service comparison are useful, though the parenthetical is slightly long and the 'place_order' naming slip prevents a perfect structure score.

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?

With no output schema and 12 optional parameters, the description does a good job explaining the return shape and the critical follow-up behavior. It is nearly complete, but the incorrect downstream tool name and lack of explicit mention of pagination in the description keep it short of excellent.

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 12 parameters well. The description reinforces terms like 'starting/cheapest price per 1000' and 'min/max quantity', but it does not add substantial new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and names the resource ('sellable social growth service catalog') with platform examples. It also distinguishes itself from get_service, explicitly noting that get_service returns the same detail for a single known id.

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 gives clear workflow guidance: present plan options, let the user choose, and pass the selected service_option_id onward rather than defaulting to the cheapest. It also points to get_service for known IDs. However, it references 'place_order' while the actual sibling tool is place_paid_order, so one routing detail is slightly inaccurate.

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