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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) align with the description. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it returns 'top-N most relevant tools with names, descriptions, and full input schemas (with curated examples) — each result is ready to call directly, no second schema lookup needed,' which is beyond what annotations convey.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. It lists example domains without being overly verbose, and every sentence adds value (usage guidance, return content details, and invocation behavior). No redundant or filler content.

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 that there is no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (top-N tools with schemas, ready to call) and how to use it. It covers purpose, parameters, behavior, and usage context completely 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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description adds meaning by explaining that 'query' accepts aliases (task, q, search, description) and specifying limit's default (20) and max (50). While the schema already provides individual descriptions, the description reinforces natural language 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Find tools by describing the data or task.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being a meta-tool for discovering other tools, listing specific domains (e.g., SEC filings, FDA drugs) and noting that results include full schemas for direct invocation.

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).' This provides clear when-to-use guidance and implies when not to use it (when a specific tool is already known).

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