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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by revealing that results are limited to page ids, titles, and canonical URLs rather than full-text page content, and by pointing to fetch for content retrieval.

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 short sentences that front-load the main function, state the return fields, and immediately route the agent to the next appropriate tool. No 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?

For a single-parameter, read-only search tool with a rich schema description and an output schema, the description covers what the tool does, what it returns, and how to continue with a result. Nothing needed for a correct call is missing.

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 single parameter is fully described in the schema with a plain-language field description and examples, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The tool description adds only the page-scope context, not additional parameter semantics.

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 ('search'), a specific resource ('pages of the Referral Flooring website'), and states the output fields (page ids, titles, canonical URLs). It is immediately distinguishable from fetch, which reads a full page.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent to use fetch with an id to read a page, which frames search as the discovery step and fetch as the retrieval step. The keyword-oriented phrasing also makes it clear when search is appropriate among the siblings.

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