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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it returns top-N relevant tools with names, descriptions, and full input schemas with curated examples, ready to call directly with no second schema lookup. This goes beyond the annotations.

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 opens with a concise, clear purpose ('Find tools by describing the data or task') and then adds a dense but purposeful enumeration of covered domains and a clear value proposition. It is a little long, but every sentence contributes useful information; no wasted words.

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 tells the agent exactly what the tool returns (top-N tools with names, descriptions, full schemas, and curated examples) and how to invoke it first for discovery. With no output schema, this return-format explanation is essential and sufficient. It completely covers selection and invocation context.

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% — all six parameters (query and its aliases, limit) are fully described in the input schema. The description provides context for the query parameter ('describing the data or task') and lists example domains, but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool finds tools by describing a data or task, with an explicit verb ('Find tools') and a specific resource ('tools'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling data-retrieval tools by positioning itself as the first step to browse the option set, not just to answer one question.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use when you need to browse, search, look up, or discover what tools exist' and 'Call this FIRST when you have many tools available and want to see the option set (not just one answer).' This provides clear context for when to use the tool and implies that other tools are for executing specific tasks rather than discovering tools.

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