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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable disclosure about the return payload (top-N tools with full schemas, ready to call directly) and that no second lookup is needed – context beyond annotations that helps the agent set expectations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then gives a categorized usage context, return format, and a clear action directive. The domain list is long but directly useful for guiding search queries, and every sentence earns its place without fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description properly explains return values (tool names, descriptions, schemas) and convinces the agent that results are directly callable. Combined with the schema examples and usage guidelines, this makes the tool fully self-contained for an agent deciding to invoke it.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, including aliases and limit defaults. The description does not add parameter semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies; the 'top-N' mention aligns with the limit parameter but adds no syntax detail.

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's function with a specific verb ('Find tools' or 'discover what tools exist') and resource (tools by data/task). It distinguishes itself from sibling domain-specific tools by positioning as a meta-search for the tool catalog, and explicitly notes 'Call this FIRST' – a clear differentiator.

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 provides explicit context for when to use: browsing/searching/discovering tools, with a domain list, and explicitly instructs 'Call this FIRST when you have many tools available.' It implies a when-not (if you already know the tool, use it directly) with 'not just one answer,' which serves as an exclusion signal.

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