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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds value by explaining that results include 'full input schemas (with curated examples)' and are 'ready to call directly,' which helps the agent understand the output format and usability.

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 achieve high density of information. First sentence states purpose and lists domains, second explains return format and usage guidance. No fluff, every word serves a role.

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?

For a discovery tool without an output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (tool names, descriptions, schemas) and how to use the results (ready to call directly). Lacks mention of pagination or error handling, but the core functionality is well-covered.

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 clear descriptions for each parameter. The description adds context by listing all aliases (query, q, task, search, description) and providing examples that demonstrate usage. This goes beyond the schema's individual descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Find tools by describing the data or task.' Provides specific examples (SEC filings, FDA drugs, etc.) and distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing discovery/browsing rather than specific domains.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this FIRST when you have many tools available and want to see the option set (not just one answer).' This guides the agent to use it for exploration before invoking specific tools, establishing clear when-to-use guidance.

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