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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and scope are partly covered. The description adds that results are 'verified' businesses in the UK home/interiors domain, which is useful context, but it does not explain result limits, pagination, ranking, or what 'verified' means.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently conveys the core search behavior and optional city filter.

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 two-parameter search with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly. The only notable omission is result behavior or pagination, which is not explained.

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 both query and city are already documented with examples. The description’s example ('kitchen fitters in Leeds') reinforces the intended combination but adds little semantic detail beyond 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 states a specific verb and resource: find verified UK home and interiors businesses by keyword and optional city. It is clearly a search/list tool rather than a detail tool, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like listing_detail or company_check.

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 through examples like kitchen fitters in Leeds, showing the intended search pattern. However, it does not say when to use this tool versus listing_detail, company_check, or category/city listing tools, nor does it state exclusions.

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