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

With readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false already declaring a safe, closed-corpus read, the description adds 'All words must match' (AND semantics) and the 'Free' cost note. It says nothing about result ordering, pagination, or what a hit contains, so it adds only modest context beyond the 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?

Three short clauses, front-loaded with the action and resource, zero filler. Every phrase carries information.

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 7-parameter search tool with no output schema, the definition omits result shape, pagination behavior and the meaning of the filter parameters. It is minimally usable for the required query parameter but incomplete for the optional filters.

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 only 43%, so limit, license, year_from and year_to carry no documentation anywhere. The description partially compensates by clarifying that the query matches titles, keywords and authors, but adds nothing about the filter parameters or their interaction.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search the ISHOB archive') and narrows scope to titles, keywords and authors. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling search_specs, so an agent must infer which search surface applies.

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?

'Free' hints at a cost consideration but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no pointer to the obvious alternative search_specs. The agent is left to guess which search tool to pick.

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