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

The description describes a read-only 'Search' operation, but the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, directly contradicting the read-only implication. Although it usefully explains that the backend resolves city names to coordinates, this behavioral detail cannot offset the core contradiction about whether the tool has side effects.

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 focused sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by usage context and a parameter behavior note. No sentences are wasted, though the location examples duplicate what is already in 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 a 10-parameter, zero-required search tool with an output schema and full schema description coverage, the description supplies purpose, trigger conditions, and location-resolution behavior. It omits pagination/sorting guidance and does not acknowledge the readOnlyHint inconsistency.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds extra semantic value by explaining that the backend resolves a city or country name into coordinates for geographic filtering, clarifying the `location` parameter's behavior beyond the schema's example list.

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 ('Search') and resource ('live assignments for independent contractors, consultants, and freelancers worldwide across all fields'), and distinguishes itself from siblings like get_assignment (single-item retrieval) by being a broad discovery tool.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('when a user asks for assignments, contract roles, freelance gigs, consulting work, or ‘uppdrag’/‘konsultuppdrag’'), including multilingual keyword triggers and geographic scoping. It does not, however, name alternative siblings or state when NOT to use it.

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