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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint, and the description adds valuable context about the data source size, coverage, and IDCC identification. This goes beyond the annotation's safety hint, though it doesn't detail result ordering or pagination behavior.

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 well-organized, with a clear purpose first, then source context, then parameter guidance. Every sentence is informative, no fluff.

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 covers purpose, source, relevant parameters, and includes limit constraints. It lacks explicit mention of offset and doesn't differentiate from siblings beyond domain, but overall is sufficiently complete for a search tool with an output schema.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates by explaining query, idcc (with a concrete example), and limit (max 50). It omits offset, a minor gap, but otherwise adds meaningful semantic detail 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 searches collective agreements (KALI), specifying the resource type, source (bulk KALI DILA), and coverage. The verb 'Recherche' and the specific domain distinguish it from sibling search 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 provides clear context on what is searched (national collective agreements, branch agreements, riders, identified by IDCC), implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a full 5.

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