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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns matching category IDs, which is useful for the downstream filter use case. However, it doesn't specify matching semantics (e.g., exact vs. fuzzy), pagination, or error behavior. This is acceptable for a simple search but leaves some behavioral ambiguity.

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 sentences, starts with the action, and wastes no words. It clearly states what the tool does and its intended use, with no redundant information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description appropriately explains the return value ('matching category IDs') and its purpose (for SearchSaasTool's category_ids filter). For a simple one-parameter search tool, this is sufficient, though it could specify whether the output is a list/array or individual IDs.

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 covers the single parameter 'q' with 'Search query', but the description adds nuance by clarifying that the query matches 'by name or keyword', enhancing the semantic meaning beyond the raw schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and this added context justifies a 4.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('SaaS Browser categories') and clearly differentiates from sibling tools by stating that it returns category IDs for use with SearchSaasTool's category_ids filter. This distinguishes it from SearchSaasTool, SearchTechnologiesTool, and SearchAlternativesTool.

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 indicates when to use the tool: to find matching category IDs for filtering results in SearchSaasTool. It implies the context (searching categories) and provides a clear alternative reference (SearchSaasTool), though it doesn't explicitly state exclusions or when not to use it.

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