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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the federated scope and the ID-format return that enables chaining to fetch. No auth/rate-limit detail, but the bar is lower with annotations present.

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?

Front-loads 'Search across' and ends with the actionable return-format hint, but the middle is a 13-item source dump that reads as padding. Some entries earn their place by signaling coverage; the sheer enumeration dilutes the key signals.

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?

Given an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values, and it correctly focuses on purpose, source coverage and the fetch handoff. The main gap is sibling differentiation against ireland_catalogue/ireland_describe, but for a two-param search tool this is largely complete.

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%: both 'query' and 'max_tokens' are fully documented in the schema with examples and defaults. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 enumerates the federated resources it queries, so the agent knows it is a broad multi-source search rather than a single-dataset lookup. However, it never explicitly differentiates itself from siblings like ireland_catalogue or ireland_call, leaving that to inference.

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 'Returns ids like cso:F1001 to pass to fetch' clause implies the intended workflow (search then fetch), which is useful routing. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to the other lookup tools (catalogue, describe, call).

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