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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the entire behavioral burden. It lacks any mention of operational constraints like rate limits, expected search latency, or whether the search index is real-time, which is crucial for an external government database tool.

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 a single, highly dense sentence that front-loads all necessary information without any unnecessary fluff or verbose structuring.

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 complexity of a 7-parameter search, the description is merely adequate. While the parameters are defined, there is no guidance on the expected output format (e.g., a list of entities), nor is it clear if the tool supports pagination for large result sets.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant domain-specific meaning, particularly for the 'sba' parameter, by listing concrete accepted values like 'A6 8(a)' and 'XX HUBZone'. This prevents ambiguous input.

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 provides a highly specific verb ('Search') and resource ('SAM.gov registered entities'). It clearly outlines the criteria used for the search (name, state, NAICS, SBA cert, and expiration window), distinguishing it from filing-specific search tools in the sibling list.

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 effectively guides usage by listing the precise types of queries supported (e.g., by NAICS vs. by SBA certification). This context implies when to use the tool (when searching entities) versus when to use a filing search tool.

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