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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about return shape (single answer vs list of Q&A), whether an empty query returns everything, or whether matching is fuzzy. For a no-annotation tool this is a serious gap.

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?

Five words is concise but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficiency; there is no front-loaded statement of what an agent actually needs to know before calling it.

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 two undocumented-in-description parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the definition leaves the agent unable to predict return content or query behavior. It is inadequate for even a simple lookup tool.

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 50%: lang is documented with its default, but query has only maxLength and no description. The tool description adds nothing about either parameter, so the meaning of query (search term? topic filter?) remains undefined in both places.

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?

"Frequently asked questions and answers" is essentially a restatement of the tool name get_faq; it signals the resource is FAQ content but supplies no verb, no scope, and no differentiation from siblings like get_business_info or get_opening_hours, which could equally answer customer questions.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus the sibling info tools, and no indication of whether the query parameter is a search filter or ignored. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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