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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real value by declaring that nothing is executed and that the output is a human-checkable interpretation — a behavioral trait the annotations do not express.

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 purpose, closed with the key exclusion. No filler and nothing repeated from the title or 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?

With one parameter, full annotation coverage, and an output schema handling return values, the description needs only to explain purpose and non-execution — both are present. It could be marginally more complete by acknowledging that search_listings is the natural next step after the user corrects the criteria.

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 parameter already carries a description ("The user's request in their own words"). The tool description echoes that idea without adding format, length, or phrasing guidance beyond the schema's minLength/maxLength constraints, 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 (shows/explains) and a specific resource (how a search request is interpreted as structured criteria), and explicitly negates the adjacent behavior with "Does not search." That single negation is what separates it from search_listings, so an agent can route correctly 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?

"the user can check and correct before searching" gives a clear usage window (pre-search verification) and "Does not search" states the exclusion. It stops short of naming search_listings as the follow-up step, so the alternative is implied rather than explicit.

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