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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and openWorld=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavior: filters AND together, text search spans title/venue/neighborhood/tags/description, and results are one page in date order with next_offset for continuation. Only missing detail is roughly what a pick entry contains.

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?

Front-loaded with a one-line capability statement, then usage, then semantics, then return/pagination. Every sentence adds information; nothing is redundant with the schema or annotations.

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 12-parameter search tool with no output schema, it covers filtering semantics, pagination and return ordering adequately. It could say a bit more about what a result item looks like, but the agent has enough to call it correctly.

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%, so the schema carries per-parameter detail and the baseline is 3. The description adds two things the schema does not state: that filters combine with AND and which fields free-text search covers – both non-obvious and genuinely useful for query construction.

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 (search) plus resource (upcoming curated picks) with the dimensions that can be filtered. It explicitly distinguishes itself from buffet_get_weekly_lineup, so an agent can route correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete example queries mapping to the tool and names the alternative (weekly lineup) with the exact condition that selects it – whole week, no filters. When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both present.

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