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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the description need not restate safety. It adds that the search scope is the user's saved data and that output ids feed fetch, though it does not mention rate limits or result caps.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core search action and scope; the fetch handoff and live-listings alternative each add routing value. No filler.

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 one-parameter, read-only search with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description supplies the essential scope and routing. It leaves minor operational details like result limits or mixed-entity grouping unspecified, but these are not critical here.

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 100% and the single query parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description repeats the same keyword categories (address, city, owner name, phone, email, template name) rather than adding syntax or constraints beyond the schema.

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 names the specific operation (search), the exact resources (saved properties, owners, postcard templates), the keyword domains, and the return handoff to fetch. It also explicitly distinguishes saved results from live listings via spur_search_properties.

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 says to use this for saved Spur records and to use spur_search_properties for live listings, and it tells the agent that results are ids meant for the fetch tool. This gives clear routing without requiring schema inspection.

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