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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint/destructiveHint/openWorldHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds a genuinely useful non-annotation detail: it requires the user's Cotlet API key with access to this app, and reinforces that the operation does not change the saved search.

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?

The core sentence is duplicated nearly verbatim ('Runs one of your saved searches and returns the listings Crexi shows for it'), wasting space. The auth note is well-placed at the end, but the repetition is a clear structural flaw.

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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so ('returns the listings Crexi shows for it'), and it discloses the auth requirement. For a 2-param read tool this is close to complete, lacking only explicit routing versus list_saved_searches.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description restates 'by name or ID as saved in Crexi' without adding syntax, format, or default details beyond the schema, 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+resource: runs one saved search and returns the listings Crexi shows for it. The scope ('one saved search') is clear, but the description doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling crexi_list_saved_searches beyond the schema's parenthetical reference.

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 clarifies that it runs exactly one saved search and that it does not modify it, which helps scope usage, but gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives guidance and never names a sibling in the description text. Usage is only implied.

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