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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered; the description adds substantive behavior the annotations can't convey, namely that the result set is pre-filtered to businesses that take AI bookings with a deposit. That constraint materially changes what the agent will get back and prevents it from treating this as a general directory search. Missing are result-count limits and empty-result behavior.

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 sentences, no filler. The domain constraint leads and the return-value note closes, so the agent can stop reading once it has what it needs.

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 two-required-parameter lookup with no output schema and clean annotations, the definition covers what the tool searches over and what it hands back. The only meaningful gap is match semantics for the free-text trade parameter, which is the one thing an agent could plausibly get wrong here.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it partially does: it constrains zip to "5-digit" (tightening the schema's 5-10 char allowance) and gives an enumerated flavor for trade via examples like plumbing, hvac, appliance repair. It still doesn't say whether trade must match those exact tokens or accepts free text/substring matching, which is the key ambiguity for an unenumerated string parameter.

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 and resource ("Find local service businesses") plus the scoping qualifier that matters most (accepts AI bookings with a deposit), and explicitly says it returns business_id values. That distinguishes it cleanly from get_business, get_open_times and book_with_deposit, which all appear to consume an id rather than produce one.

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 closing clause "Returns business_id values for the other tools" positions this as the entry point of the workflow, which is real routing guidance the agent can act on. It doesn't state what to do when zero results come back or whether results are capped, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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