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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It explains filtering and sorting but does not mention side effects, data freshness, pagination behavior (limit up to 50), return format, or error cases. The output schema exists but is not referenced. Transparency is moderate.

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 well-structured with an initial summary and a labeled 'Args' section. The summary sentence is somewhat marketing-ish ('Smart lead generation') but not overly verbose. The parameter list is clear and consistent. A bit of fluff ('Perfect for finding contractors') could be trimmed, but overall it's efficient.

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 9 parameters and no required ones, the description covers input semantics thoroughly. However, it does not explain output structure, pagination limits beyond the 'limit' parameter, or edge cases (empty results). Since an output schema exists, the description could be more complete by referencing output fields or linking to the 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?

The input schema has no descriptions for any of the 9 parameters, so the description carries the full burden. It explains each parameter clearly (e.g., 'region: Filter by region name... Empty = all', 'min_rating: Minimum rating (0-5). 0 = no filter') with examples and default behaviors, adding significant value 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 clearly states the tool finds 'the best construction companies' with specific criteria, distinguishing it from sibling 'search_companies' which likely provides a more basic search. The verb 'find' and resource 'best construction companies' are specific. The use cases (lead generation, contractors, market research) reinforce purpose.

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 implies when to use (lead generation, finding contractors) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or how it differs from alternatives like 'search_companies' or 'smart_match'. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are provided. It's adequate but lacks explicit guidance.

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