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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does reasonably well: it discloses that results are complete and enumerable, that a total count is returned, and that the sibling does semantic ranking. It doesn't mention permissions or rate limits, but for a read-only listing tool those are minor gaps.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero padding. The core purpose and the sibling differentiation are front-loaded, and the practical paging guidance trails appropriately.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by telling the agent a total count is returned and the list is complete/enumerable, and the schema documents nextOffset for paging. Only finer return-format details are unstated, which is a small gap for a low-complexity list tool.

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 three parameters (limit, filter, offset) are already fully documented in the schema, including the multi-word AND matching behavior. The description's 'use filter to narrow' and 'use offset to page' restate schema guidance rather than adding new meaning; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List this business's services from its extracted catalogue') and immediately distinguishes it from the sibling `services` tool by characterizing that one as a semantic search returning closest matches. An agent can route between the two without opening either schema.

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 names the alternative (`services`), explains the condition that selects this tool (need for a complete, enumerable list with a count), and directs the agent to use `filter` to narrow and `offset` to page. When-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are both covered.

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