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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds value beyond this by clarifying account scoping ('the account's recent searches'), listing the return fields, and indicating how the results should be used downstream, which are behaviors not captured by 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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the main purpose and returned fields, followed by a concise usage clause. Every word contributes useful information with no redundancy or 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, existing output schema, read-only annotations), the description provides all essential context: what it returns, account scope, and how the results connect to sibling tools. This is fully complete for the tool's complexity level.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for the single 'limit' parameter, including its default (10) and max (25) values. The description does not repeat or extend the parameter semantics, so it adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already offers.

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 clearly states the action ('List recent searches') and the resource ('account's recent searches'), and enumerates the returned fields (id, niche, location, result count, when). It differentiates from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning that search_ids from this tool are used with get_search_results or export_leads, making its role distinct.

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 the usage context by explaining that the search_id obtained from this tool is used with get_search_results or export_leads, which positions list_searches as the entry point for those operations. It does not provide explicit exclusions or alternative scenarios, but the guidance is clear and helpful for an agent deciding when to call it.

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