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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by disclosing pagination, returned fields (price, location, category, agent info), and the category-agnostic matching behavior. No contradictions; description enriches beyond annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, each sentence adds value. No wasted words; concise and to the point.

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 10 parameters (all optional) and no output schema, the description covers the main use case, lists returned fields, and explains pagination. It reasonably compensates for the missing output schema with a clear summary of what is returned.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds significant context: explains wedge as an optional hint, describes mode as catalog-driven or reverse-auction-driven, and clarifies that matching is category-agnostic. This adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 browses open buyer demand (Wants) for a seller agent, with verbs like browse, search, filter. It differentiates from siblings like demand.search by specifying it's for fulfilling as a seller agent and emphasizes category-agnostic matching.

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 description explicitly says 'use this to discover what users are trying to buy so you can respond with offers,' providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or alternatives among siblings, missing full exclusion guidance.

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