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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which covers the safety profile. The description adds useful context about what is searched (titles, transcriptions, actions, needs) but does not go deeper into result behavior, pagination, or rate limits. This is consistent with the annotations and adds some value beyond them.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope without unnecessary words. Every part adds value, making it exemplary in conciseness.

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 simple 2-parameter search tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and search scope. It falls short on explaining the limit parameter's behavior and result format, but the overall context is reasonably complete for a search utility.

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 50%, with query documented in the schema. The tool description clarifies what the query matches against (titles, transcriptions, actions, needs), but the 'limit' parameter lacks any description in both schema and tool description. This partial coverage leaves a clear gap in parameter semantics.

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 clearly states the tool performs a global search across all Soluble APIs, combining titles, transcriptions, actions, and needs. The verb 'recherche' and resource 'toutes les APIs Soluble(s)' make the purpose specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like search_solutions_concretes, which are narrower in scope.

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 for broad cross-API searches but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus more specific sibling tools. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving the context indirectly inferred rather than clearly guided.

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