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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adequately discloses output contents, pagination behavior (10 results per page), filtering options, and the fact that matching categories are also returned. It does not cover rate limits or error behavior, but those are not critical for this read-oriented search tool.

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 description is compact and front-loaded: it names the action and resource first, then lists useful output fields, a cross-reference, and pagination/filter behavior. Every sentence adds information and there is no filler.

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 appropriately enumerates the key fields returned for each match and notes that categories are also included. Combined with the schema's parameter documentation, an agent has enough context to select and call the tool correctly without additional inference.

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 the schema already documents query, page, min_rating, and min_review_count. The description adds only light extra context by restating the search purpose and filter/pagination behavior, which is sufficient but not substantially 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 uses a specific verb ('Search') with a specific resource ('Trustpilot companies') and scopes it by 'name or keyword.' It also distinguishes itself from category-focused tools by naming trustpilot_category_companies for category_id follow-up, so an agent can tell it apart from sibling tools.

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 clearly sets the context: search for companies by name or keyword, with filtering and pagination. It gives an alternative path for category_id use via trustpilot_category_companies, but it does not explicitly state when not to use other related siblings such as trustpilot_company_reviews or search_trustpilot_categories.

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