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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the search fields and output (slugs), and that filtering is optional, which implies read-only behavior. However, it does not disclose edge cases like no results or sorting, nor does it explicitly say it is a non-mutating operation, though the verb 'suchen/filtern' makes this unlikely.

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, front-loading the core action and filtering capabilities, then stating the output. It is compact and every word earns its place, with no redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with 5 optional params and no output schema, the description covers the essential search fields and result type (slugs). However, it omits details like pagination, sorting, or result structure beyond slugs, and does not mention the limit parameter's default behavior, which the schema does document. Overall, it is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 covers all 5 parameters, but the description adds value by clarifying that query searches across title/slug/description and that country is ISO-2. It also indicates category comes from list_categories (though schema already says this). This extra context justifies a score above baseline.

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 the tool searches/filters templates using free text and optional filters (language, country, category). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_template (single template retrieval) and fill_template (template execution) by focusing on discovery. The scope (title/slug/description) is explicit.

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 the tool is for finding templates, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like get_template. It mentions returning slugs for further use, which suggests it precedes template operations, but no direct comparison or exclusion is provided. A more explicit statement like 'use this to find templates before filling' would be clearer.

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