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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description complements by adding that results come with full schemas and are ready to call directly. It also lists covered domains. No contradictions, and the description adds 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 moderately long but efficiently packs purpose, usage guidance, domain list, and return format into a few sentences. It is front-loaded with the core action. Minor room for shortening, but overall well-structured.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description thoroughly explains what the tool returns (relevant tool names, descriptions, full schemas with examples) and states that results are directly callable. This is comprehensive for a discovery tool.

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%, and the description provides examples of aliases ('task, q, description, search') and sample queries. While helpful, the schema already describes each parameter fully, so the description adds limited additional semantics beyond usage examples.

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 'Find tools by describing the data or task' and enumerates numerous domain examples (SEC filings, financials, FDA drugs, etc.), establishing a very specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by positioning itself as a meta-discovery tool, not a domain-specific tool.

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 instructs 'Call this FIRST when you have many tools available and want to see the option set (not just one answer),' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It implicitly conveys when not to use (when the target tool is already known) and does not require alternative naming since it is the entry point.

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