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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read-only search ('Search ... query-only'), but says nothing about rate limits, authentication, Dehashed API dependency, data source sensitivity, or result behavior. The disclosed behavior is minimal and ambiguous.

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 short and front-loads the core action, but the leading 'Password Dump Search:' label duplicates both the tool name and the following verb, slightly reducing signal density. Still, no unnecessary sentences or digressions.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no annotations, this might seem adequate, but it lacks any guidance on parameter format, use-case fit among many breach-lookup siblings, or external service prerequisites. Even though an output schema exists, the surrounding context is too thin to ensure correct invocation.

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 0% for the sole parameter q, and the description does not compensate. 'query-only' suggests q is the search term but does not specify whether q expects a password, email, username, domain, or hash format. Default empty string is also not explained.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Search'), a specific resource ('Dehashed'), and the object ('leaked passwords'), so an agent can tell the core operation. However, it does not distinguish this from closely related siblings such as dehashed_domain, breach_aggregator, or leakcheck, all of which could plausibly handle password/breach lookups.

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 phrase '(query-only)' implies the tool takes a query string, but there is no guidance about when to choose this over sibling breach/password tools, no exclusions, and no context such as needing Dehashed credentials. An agent is left to infer when this tool is appropriate.

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