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

Goes well beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint: discloses the data source and residential-proxy route, the 25-per-page and newest-first ordering, that financial details beyond asking price require opening the listing page, and a full cost model ($0.002 USDC per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, failures free). Cost and payment-scheme disclosure is exactly the kind of behavior an agent cannot infer from annotations.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with the resource and returned fields before pagination/geography and then commercial terms. Every clause carries information; the field enumeration is long but directly useful for relevance judgements.

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?

An output schema exists so return shape need not be explained, and the description still covers source, coverage limits, data gaps and pricing. The one material omission is differentiation from ecommerce_dealstream_listings, which leaves ambiguity for an agent choosing between two same-domain tools.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds semantics the schema lacks: page size of 25, a hard cap at page 50, and newest-first ordering. State is only restated as whole-US vs. one-state, which the schema already covers.

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+resource ('DealStream businesses for sale') and enumerates exactly what a listing contains (title, asking price USD, description, industry, city/state, id, link). It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identically named sibling ecommerce_dealstream_listings, which is the main thing an agent would need to disambiguate.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'for the whole US or one state' signals when to pass a state, and 'page 1 to 50' signals the crawl ceiling, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion, and no pointer to the competing dealstream sibling.

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