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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the description adds context about scope (web content) and the return value (page ids) that are not in annotations. It clarifies the output is an intermediate step for fetch, which is useful beyond structured data. Minor gap: no mention of result limits or formatting, but with annotations covering safety, this is acceptable.

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 sentences with minimal waste. The core purpose and scope are front-loaded, and the exclusion of DPC Finder is stated at the end. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Complexity is low (single parameter, no nested objects). An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description covers what is searched and how results link to fetch, but could mention if the search is case-insensitive or supports partial matches. This is minor, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 has 0% description coveragehare and only one parameter 'query'. The description implies that query is a keyword string but does not add syntax details. However, baseline is 3; the description's context on scope helps the agent understand what to query, earning a 4 because it compensates for the schema gap.

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 states it performs keyword search over tabflows.com page titles and summaries, enumerates content types (product, pricing, FAQs, etc.), and specifies it returns page ids to pass to fetch. This distinguishes it from search_dpc_practices and other retrieval tools.

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 states the scope of indexed content and names the alternative search_dpc_practices for DPC Finder listings. This tells the agent when to use this tool vs. the sibling, leaving no ambiguity.

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