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

With readOnlyHint already covering the safety profile, the description adds substantial behavioral context: provenance of claimed vs imported providers, the meaning and limits of la_city_business_tax_registration, that licenses are unchecked, an explicit instruction not to call results licensed/verified and to point users to cslb.ca.gov, and the conditional presence of booking_url. This is far beyond what the annotations convey.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the example appears at the end as a useful anchor. The description is long, but nearly every sentence (provenance, tax registration caveat, license disclaimer, booking_url condition) carries necessary information an agent would otherwise get wrong.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by describing return fields (url to profile, claimed_by_owner, la_city_business_tax_registration, license_as_listed_by_provider, booking_url) and their caveats. An agent has enough to call the tool and correctly frame results.

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 75%, so limit and cursor are already documented there. The description adds that category is matched loosely (name or slug) and provides the example value set, though city receives no extra semantic detail beyond the schema's maxLength.

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 and resource — finding contractors/designers/expediters/trades on the A-du services marketplace — and enumerates trades (plumbing, electrical, HVAC). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search tools like search_managers, search_plans, and search_rentals.

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?

Gives a concrete use case ("list plumbers on A-du that serve Burbank") plus a full example invocation with category and city. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or a when-not-to-use condition, but the context for calling it is unambiguous.

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