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

The description adds value beyond the annotations by disclosing the return format ('ids, titles and URLs only') and the limitation that full text requires a separate fetch call. It also clarifies that the tool does not cover live availability or customer data, which is useful behavioral context not present in the annotations.

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 three tight sentences, each earning its place: purpose, return format plus next step, and exclusions with alternatives. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 single-parameter search tool with full schema coverage and annotations indicating read-only/idempotent behavior, the description covers all necessary invocation details: what to search, what results look like, how to get full content, and when to use a different tool. Nothing an agent needs for correct use is missing.

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 already describes the query parameter fully with an example, so the baseline is 3. The description enriches it by specifying the domain and scope of valid queries ('Johnson Bros. Plumbing pages about services, service area, pricing policy, or common questions'), helping an agent formulate appropriate queries beyond the generic schema text.

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 precise verb ('find') and resource ('Johnson Bros. Plumbing pages'), and specifies the topical scope (services, service area, pricing policy, common questions). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting it returns only ids, titles, and URLs, and that fetch should be used for full text.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance (searching knowledge pages) and explicit when-not-to-use guidance with named alternatives ('Do not use it to check live appointment availability (use get_availability) or to look up a customer'). It also directs users to 'call fetch with an id' after searching, providing a clear workflow.

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