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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: asynchronous staged execution, one-search-per-organization concurrency limit, public-pages-only scraping, and additive behavior ('senza toccare quelle che hai già') consistent with destructiveHint=false. Also states return semantics ('le province avviate o il motivo per cui non è partita').

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraint. Efficient with little waste, though the parenthetical '(sigle, max 8)' duplicates the schema.

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 an async job launcher with one param and no output schema, the description covers the async model, concurrency limit, non-destructive additive behavior, and what the call returns. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly and interpret the result.

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 description only restates schema facts ('sigle, max 8' matches the maxItems: 8 and the schema's own description). No additional format or semantic meaning is added, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Avvia la ricerca') and resource ('nuove aziende in una o più province') with scope (max 8). The staged/asynchronous framing ('Procede a tappe distanziate') distinguishes it from a plain lookup like cerca_aziende without opening either schema.

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 a usage constraint ('una ricerca alla volta per organizzazione') but never names an alternative tool or an explicit when-to-use/when-not condition relative to siblings such as cerca_aziende or metti_in_coda. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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