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

Annotations already establish this is a safe read-only, closed-world operation. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: the fixed geographic coverage boundary and the fact that only published members are returned, which tells the agent what results will and won't appear.

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 tight sentences that front-load the purpose, then coverage limits, then return shape and the get_pro handoff. No filler, though the geographic scope and return details could be marginally tightened.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing the return contents (published members with trades, service areas, profile links) and how to continue (id with get_pro). For a single-param search tool this covers everything an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the query parameter's constraints (single trade/service/name, 2-80 chars, no sentence, no location) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds minimal parameter-level meaning beyond naming the searchable dimensions.

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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (Chicagoland member contractor directory) and names the qualifying dimensions (trade, service, company name). It is clearly distinguishable from get_pro, which it explicitly points to for details.

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?

Gives clear context for when to use it and names get_pro as the follow-up for result details via the id. It does not state exclusions (e.g., non-member or out-of-region searching), so it falls just short of full when/when-not guidance.

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