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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool returns top-N relevant tools with names, descriptions, and full input schemas ready to call, and that it is meant to be called first. This provides useful behavioral context beyond 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 is two focused sentences: first states purpose and domain coverage, second gives usage guidance and return value details. No wasted words, front-loaded with essential information.

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 the tool's role as a search/discovery tool with 6 parameters (mostly aliases), no output schema, and clear annotations, the description fully explains what the tool does, when to use it, and what it returns, making it complete for agent understanding.

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 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds value by explaining that multiple aliases (query, q, task, search, description) are accepted, and provides examples in the schema examples, which clarifies usage.

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 starts with 'Find tools by describing the data or task' and enumerates specific data domains, clearly stating the tool's purpose as a discovery and search mechanism. It distinguishes from sibling tools by being a meta-tool that returns other tools' schemas.

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 explicitly says 'Call this FIRST when you have many tools available and want to see the option set (not just one answer).' It implies when not to use it (when you already know which tool) but doesn't explicitly state exclusions. Alternatives are the sibling tools, but no direct comparison is made.

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