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

The description adds context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by specifying that it searches published, verified parks with optional filters. It does not disclose pagination or rate limits but is adequate given the annotation.

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?

Single sentence of 9 words, front-loaded with key information. No wasted words.

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?

Despite having 9 parameters, no output schema, and no required fields, the description is too brief. It lacks detail on defaults, result format, pagination, or behavior, making it incomplete for a complex search 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description's mention of 'geo and region filters' only partially explains the 9 parameters. It omits details for 'q', 'page', 'per_page', 'park_type', and others, leaving significant gaps.

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 published, verified parks with optional geo and region filters. The verb 'Search' and resource 'parks' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search' and 'search.global'.

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 usage for searching parks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'parks.get' or 'trails.search'. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites.

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