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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, which the description does not contradict. The description adds useful context: it searches by substring match for breed_text and that adoption happens via linked pages. However, it does not cover rate limits, pagination, or result structure.

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 (English and German) that are front-loaded with the essential purpose. There is no wasted text; every word adds 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?

For a search tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the scope and action. It mentions the platform (HonestDog) and the adoption process via linked pages, though it omits details on result format or pagination. Slightly light on completeness but sufficient for typical use.

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?

With schema description coverage at 40%, the description reiterates the filter fields (breed text, size, gender, Bundesland) but adds little detail beyond the schema. It does not clarify the 'limit' or 'size' parameter constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema partially covers two parameters.

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 clearly states the tool searches for adoptable shelter dogs on HonestDog, specifying searchable criteria (breed, size, gender, Bundesland). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_breeders and search_breeds.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when not to use it or provide context for choosing between search_shelter_dogs and sibling tools like search_breeders or get_breed_health_profile.

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