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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond those: result pagination of up to 24 per page, inclusion of a Nearwick page address for citation, and the two supported result orderings. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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?

Two tightly written sentences carry the full picture: what is searched, how results are filtered, page size, output content, and ordering. Nothing is wasted and the most important action and resource are front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description responsibly notes result size and the key return content (Nearwick page address for citation). Combined with the rich input schema and read-only annotations, the description covers what an agent needs to call the tool correctly, though it could marginally expand on result fields.

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 input schema already documents every parameter. The description adds high-level meaning by mentioning words, category, town/region, and page attributes, but it does not need to repeat parameter details; it stays at a useful conceptual level rather than compensating for missing schema documentation.

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 names a specific verb and resource: searching one country's listed businesses. It also enumerates the searchable dimensions—words, category, town or region, and page attributes—making the tool's scope immediately recognizable and distinguishable from the singular get_business or list-only siblings.

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 gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate: searching businesses within a single country using filters like category, location, or words. It does not explicitly name exclusions or alternatives, but the scope is clear enough that an agent can infer when to use it versus get_business, list_categories, or list_countries.

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