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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and clearly discloses that the tool is read-only, causes no provider call, and triggers no payment. It also communicates that the returned information covers contract, pricing, runtime, failure, and trust, giving the agent a realistic expectation of what the tool does.

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?

One dense sentence front-loads the action and resource, then lists covered aspects efficiently. Every clause earns its place and there is no redundant wording.

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 zero-parameter discovery tool with an output schema present, the description fully covers what the tool is for, what it will not do, and what dimensions of the capability it reports. Nothing necessary for correct invocation is missing.

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 is empty with 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameters needing explanation. Per the zero-parameter baseline, the description is adequate without adding parameter detail.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Discover and inspect') and resource ('SeekAPI capability product_keyword_search_v0'), and enumerates the aspects covered. It clearly distinguishes this discovery tool from the sibling invoke_* tools.

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 notes it is read-only and makes no provider call or payment, signaling when to use it as an inspection step before invocation. It does not explicitly name the invoke_* siblings, but the read-only framing plus sibling names make the intended use clear.

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