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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behaviors. The description adds that results are paginated, which is useful additional behavioral context.

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 well-structured sentences: first defines purpose and matching criteria, second provides usage guidance and pagination note. No unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, good annotations, and complete schema, the description sufficiently covers all necessary information: purpose, scope, matching, and pagination.

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% and includes detailed parameter descriptions. The description essentially reiterates the matching scope and provides examples, but adds minimal new semantic meaning beyond 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 searches businesses in a single Mexican state by keyword, matching against name, activity, or address. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like denue_search_by_name which likely does nationwide search.

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 advises using this tool for state-scoped queries that need more than just business name, with examples. It implicitly contrasts with nationwide searches, and the schema explicitly mentions denue_search_by_name for nationwide, providing clear context.

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