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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, consistent with a search tool. The description adds the behavioral detail that an empty query returns all courses, which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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 short sentences with no unnecessary words. Every sentence contributes essential information: the tool's purpose and a special behavior. Well-structured and 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one required parameter, no output schema or nested objects), the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, the parameter meaning, and a special case. No additional context is needed.

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 parameter 'query' with description 'Tema o palabra clave'. The description adds value by giving concrete examples of valid queries (e.g., TIA Portal, SCL) and explaining the behavior when empty, enhancing understanding.

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 it searches for Siemens Programming courses by topic, providing example topics like TIA Portal and SCL. The verb 'Busca' (search) is specific and distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_course or list_categories.

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 explains when to use the tool: when searching by topic. It also mentions the empty query returns all courses. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide direct comparisons to siblings, though the sibling list implies alternatives.

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