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

Annotations already indicate a safe, read-only, idempotent operation (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false). The description adds key behavioral details: returns top-N relevant tools with full schemas and curated examples, ready to call without a second lookup. No contradictions with 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?

The description is a single, well-structured paragraph that starts with the core purpose, provides concrete examples, explains the return value, and gives usage guidance. Every sentence is informative; no wasted 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?

Despite the lack of an output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns (tool names, descriptions, input schemas with examples). Annotations cover safety constraints. The tool is self-contained and the agent can immediately understand its role and behavior.

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 descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description adds value by clarifying that 'query' accepts natural language and lists aliases (task, q, description, search). It also explains the 'limit' parameter's default and max. This goes beyond the schema alone.

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 lists numerous example domains (SEC filings, drugs, real estate, etc.) and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'search' by emphasizing that this tool discovers tools themselves, not data. The explicit instruction 'Call this FIRST when you have many tools available and want to see the option set' reinforces its unique role.

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 explains when to use: 'when you need to browse, search, look up, or discover what tools exist' and recommends calling it first when many tools are available. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context implies it is for tool discovery rather than direct data queries. The guidance is clear and actionable.

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