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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only and non-destructive, covering safety. The description adds the condition that results are limited to clubs with a public class schedule, which is a useful functional constraint. However, it does not disclose pagination, limit behavior, or return format, so it adds some but not full transparency.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and subject, and all words add meaning.

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?

The description lacks explicit parameter semantics and any notes on result limits or output format. Given the sparse schema (no property descriptions) and lack of output schema, this leaves gaps for an agent to correctly use the 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It implies the query is the club name via 'by club name', but does not explicitly map it to the query parameter or describe the limit parameter at all. This is insufficient for a 2-parameter tool with no schema descriptions.

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 states 'Search clubs with a public class schedule by club name.' This specifies a concrete action (search), a resource (clubs), and a filter (public class schedule). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling list_public_classes by targeting clubs rather than classes, but does not explicitly name that alternative, so it is clear but not maximal.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_public_classes. It does not mention any exclusions or conditions. An agent must infer that this is for clubs, but there is no explicit contrast.

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