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

Annotations already establish readOnly, non-destructive and closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely useful operational context beyond them: it surfaces the filtering dimensions and the 10-stores-per-page pagination contract, which an agent needs when deciding whether to page through results.

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 sentences, each earning its place: what is listed and what comes back, what can be filtered, and the page size. Purpose is front-loaded with zero 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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required, and the read-only annotations cover the safety profile. The description covers scope, filtering and pagination adequately; the only gap is not mentioning the find_city dependency relationship, which the schema does carry via city_id.

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 baseline is 3. The description restates the query filter scope and page size but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema's own per-parameter descriptions ('Part of the store name, address, mall or metro station', 'Page number, from 1').

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 ('List kari stores in a city') and even enumerates the returned fields (address, opening hours, coordinates), which distinguishes it from get_product/search_products. It does not name or explicitly contrast any sibling, so it falls short of a 5, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 implies when it applies ('in a city', 'Filter by part of the name, address, mall or metro station'), which tells the agent what kind of lookup this handles. However, it never states when to prefer it over check_availability or how it relates to find_city (the required city_id dependency is only in the schema), so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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