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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds context beyond that by explaining the depth of the search and that results are directly consumable by 'get-endpoint'. This gives useful behavioral information about the output pipeline without contradicting the read-only nature.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the core action, then gives the use case and downstream handoff, with every sentence earning its place.

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 single-parameter, read-only search tool, this description is complete. It explains what is searched, why to use it, and how results should be handled next; no output schema is required because the description already establishes the connection to 'get-endpoint'.

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 100%, so the 'pattern' parameter is already well documented as a case-insensitive search pattern. The description adds only a general reference to 'search keywords', which is consistent but does not materially expand on 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 names a specific verb ('deep search'), a clear resource ('API endpoints'), and the scope of the search ('paths, operations, and parameters'). It distinguishes itself from siblings such as list-endpoints by emphasizing discovery instead of simple enumeration.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: 'to find specific API capabilities, required parameters, or data models based on search keywords.' It also gives a clear downstream workflow by noting results can be passed into 'get-endpoint', though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions.

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