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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that data comes 'as listed on EstateSales.NET' and that results are geographically scoped 'near a US ZIP code,' which are useful behavioral details beyond the 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?

Two sentences with no filler; the core purpose is front-loaded and the use case follows. Every clause earns its place.

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 lists the return fields (company name, business address, phone, coordinates, page) and the geographic scope. It also ties to a sibling tool for tracing, making it complete for an agent to decide and invoke.

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%, with postal_code, city, and state_code all described. The description doesn't add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('operating') and resource ('Estate-sale companies near a US ZIP code'), and lists the exact fields returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by referencing estatesales_search and focusing on companies rather than sales.

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?

Provides clear use cases: 'for hiring one, or for tracing which company is behind a sale found via estatesales_search.' This gives an agent context on when to invoke it, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools beyond estatesales_search.

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