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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, meaning the tool is safe and returns a snapshot. The description adds the 'per-query search, not a bulk export' caveat and result cap of 50, which are useful beyond annotations. Does not contradict 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 compact, two sentences, and front-loads the core purpose. Every piece of information (source, filters, result cap, ordering, non-bulk note) is useful and non-redundant.

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?

The tool is a low-complexity search with no output schema. The description covers the essentials: what it searches, filters, result limit, ordering, and a caveat. However, it does not mention that all parameters are optional or that omitting filters returns a broad set, which could be clarified given openWorldHint. Minor gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so all parameter descriptions are in the schema. The description mentions filtering by state, NAICS, keyword, or tier but does not add extra semantics beyond what the schema already provides. The 'tier' parameter is an enum with clear definitions in the schema.

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 specifies the tool as a search for active federal construction and renovation contract opportunities from SAM.gov, with filtering by state, NAICS, keyword, or value tier. It distinguishes from siblings like get_opportunity (which likely fetches a specific record) and list_states (which lists states).

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 usage: when you need to search or filter opportunities, use this tool. It notes the result limit and ordering, and explicitly states it is not a bulk export. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like get_opportunity for retrieving a single record.

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