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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that — no mention of result limits, pagination, ranking, or breadth of the directory search.

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 short lines, purpose front-loaded, then parameter examples in name: meaning form. 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?

For a simple read-only search with no output schema, the description covers purpose and parameter meaning adequately, but omits result-shape expectations (how many businesses, what fields) and matching behavior, leaving the agent to infer them from the response.

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% (only titles and empty defaults), so the description must compensate — and it does, giving a concrete example for each of the three parameters (query='plumber', category='plumbing', locality='Petawawa'). It doesn't clarify matching semantics (substring vs exact, AND/OR combination), so it falls just short of 5.

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 (Search) and resource (directory of bookable service businesses), which clearly separates it from get_business (single lookup) and list_services (services within a business). It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

'All filters optional' tells the agent every call is valid with zero arguments, which is useful implied usage, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this discovery tool over get_business or list_services once a business is known.

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