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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds that it returns top-N tools with full input schemas and curated examples, ready to call without a second lookup. No contradictions, and adds meaningful context about output format.

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 with front-loaded main purpose. Every sentence adds value: first defines the action, second details output and usage positioning. No redundant text.

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 discovery tool without an output schema, the description fully covers return value (tool names, descriptions, schemas, examples) and usage context (first call for many options). No gaps.

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%, so baseline 3 is appropriate. Description mentions query as natural language and aliases, but adds little beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions. The limit parameter's defaults are covered by the schema.

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 discovers tools by describing data/task, distinguishing it from siblings by positioning it as a first-call meta-tool. The verb 'discover tools' combined with domain examples makes the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly says to use when browsing or discovering tools, and advises calling it FIRST when many tools are available. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance, but the context strongly implies it's a preliminary step, not for direct answers.

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