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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false (write operation), destructiveHint=false (not destructive), openWorldHint=true (side effects like alerts). The description adds context about alert creation ('get alerts when new matching listings appear') and the return value, providing behavioral insight beyond the annotation flags. No contradiction.

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 well-structured sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words. The description efficiently conveys purpose, prerequisites, analogous tool, and return value.

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?

Given 10 parameters (4 with enums) and no output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, analogous tool, return value, and gives an example. It does not detail all parameters but the 'same filters' reference partially compensates. Minor gap: no mention of error cases or idempotency.

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 coverage is 20% (only name and alert_frequency have descriptions). The description adds that filters are 'the same as search_listings' and mentions alert_frequency defaults to daily, but does not detail each parameter. With low coverage, more explanation would help, though many parameters are self-explanatory from names/enums.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Save a property search') and includes an example ('2-bed apartments for rent under $800 in Villa Morra'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_listings (which searches but does not save) and delete_saved_search (which deletes).

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 explicitly states the prerequisite ('Requires a connected account — if not connected, use connect_account first'), references an analogous tool ('Uses the same filters as search_listings'), and mentions the return value ('Returns the saved id'), giving clear when-to-use and alternatives.

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