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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds value by specifying exactly what the tool returns (exact input schema, read/write effect, domain, title, description) and implies it performs no mutation. This exceeds the annotation baseline without contradicting it.

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?

Two sentences, zero fluff. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the prerequisite is stated in the same breath. Every word contributes to agent understanding.

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 one-parameter tool with a clear return payload described in the description, nothing is missing. The description covers what the agent needs to invoke it correctly and what to expect in response, even without 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the parameter description already states to call discover first. The tool description reinforces this by saying the operation name comes from algolia_discover_tools, adding context about where the value originates. This extra guidance justifies a slight elevation above the baseline.

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 a clear action (inspect one Algolia operation) and resource (operation returned by algolia_discover_tools). It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the discover tool as the source and the call tool as the alternative for execution. The agent knows exactly what this tool does and how it differs.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: before calling the operation, and it instructs to call algolia_discover_tools first to obtain operation names. This effectively tells the agent when to use this tool vs. alternatives, leaving no ambiguity.

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