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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world. The only added behavioral detail is the conditional 'with its own website where the record has one', which is minor; no auth, rate-limit, or lookup-failure behavior is disclosed.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. Its brevity is fine; the shortfall is substance, not length.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but with 3 parameters at 0% coverage, no usage routing, and a name/resource mismatch, the definition leaves an agent under-equipped to invoke this correctly.

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 0%, and the description only gestures at the 'maker'/'by name' parameter. It says nothing about 'market' or 'decision_id', leaving two of three parameters undocumented in both schema and prose.

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 verb and a resource ('find a maker on the grocery record by name'), but the resource conflicts with the tool name/title ('find_buyer' / 'Find Buyer'). It also reads nearly identically to the sibling 'find_makers', so an agent cannot confidently tell the two apart from the text.

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 phrase 'Qualify the buyer' hints at intent but gives no when-to-use condition, no prerequisites, and no comparison to the obvious alternative 'find_makers'. Nothing tells the agent when this tool is the right choice over its siblings.

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