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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds context that this is a catalog-browsing operation and mentions query filtering, but it does not disclose return shape, pagination behavior, or any other runtime nuances beyond what annotations and schema already cover.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the primary purpose, then explains the key query-filtering behavior. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple read-only list operation with zero required parameters, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly: browse the catalog, discover addable services, and optionally filter by query. It could be more complete by noting the distinction from list_site_pcp_services or describing the response shape, but those are minor gaps given the low complexity.

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 adds only a helpful example for the query parameter ('google'), which is useful but not extensive. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 states a specific action ('Browse the catalog') on a specific resource ('Privacy Controls and Cookie Policy (PCP) services') and clearly frames the scope as discovering services available to add to a site. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_site_pcp_services and get_pcp_service.

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 clearly explains when to use the tool: to discover services that can be added to a site. It gives a concrete example of filtering by query. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or point to alternatives such as list_site_pcp_services for services already associated with a site.

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