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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe, externally-scoped read. The description adds little beyond that — no note on result shape, pagination, or whether matching is substring vs exact. With the safety profile pre-covered, this is adequate but thin.

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 tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and the selection guidance second. No filler, though the second sentence assumes the reader already knows what Autohire is.

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 read-only search this covers the essentials, but with no output schema the description never hints at what a match looks like (profile handle, wallet, ids), which an agent needs to chain into crew_lock_holder_kol or crew_notify_hired_crew.

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% and both parameters are documented in-schema, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'by handle or wallet' slightly enriches the q parameter's meaning, but adds no format, substring, or case-sensitivity 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?

States a specific verb (Search) and resource (CREW KOL / Pump profile directory), plus the matching key (handle or wallet). It is clearer than most siblings, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from crew_discover or crew_list_kols, which sound like adjacent directory operations.

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?

Explicitly names an alternative and the condition that favors it: 'Prefer manual crew selection from this directory; Autohire is a fallback/convenience.' This routes the agent away from crew_autohire when deliberate selection is wanted, but gives no guidance on when this tool is inappropriate or how it relates to the other search/list siblings.

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