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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'Returns ranked results with ratings, pricing, and contact info,' which gives some behavioral insight, but it does not explicitly disclose that the operation is read-only, mention side effects, or note default location behavior. The word 'search' implies safety, but it is not explicit.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose and including key output details. No redundant or extraneous content.

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?

The description covers the core use case and return format, and the schema richly documents all parameters. It lacks explicit mention of default location or category inference, but these are available in the schema. Given no output schema, the description's return-info statement adds sufficient completeness.

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% with each parameter described, so the description adds little beyond the schema. The description does not elaborate on parameter behavior or relationships; the schema already documents each field. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Search' and identifies the resource as 'licensed home service providers (HVAC, plumbing, electrical)' with a location scope. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like home_profile, job_history, and provider_profile, which are not search-focused.

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 use when needing to find service providers, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor alternatives. Sibling tool names suggest they serve different purposes, but the description does not state this.

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