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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals two non-obvious behaviors: default sort is 'savings' and demos are hidden unless 'include=demo' is supplied. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond a bare 'search' statement, though it does not cover response format or side effects.

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?

The description is two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds high-value defaults in the second sentence. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

Given three undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse for an agent to reliably construct a correct search query. It lacks valid sort values, q semantics, maxPrice meaning, result shape, and usage compared to sibling tools. The two behavioral notes are useful but not sufficient for complete invocation confidence.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only partially does. It hints that 'include=demo' is a query flag and that sort has a default value, but it does not explain the 'q' parameter's expected format, the valid values for 'sort', or what 'maxPrice' does. This leaves significant parameter ambiguity.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search sealed handoffs.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and the domain it operates in. It adds useful default behavior (sort savings, demos hidden) that further disambiguates it from the sibling 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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use discover versus its siblings such as preview, status, or file. There are no when-not-to-use instructions, prerequisites, or alternative tool routing. The only contextual hints are behavioral defaults, not usage selection guidance.

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