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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description discloses the behavior of returning top-N relevant tools with names, descriptions, and full input schemas, plus curated examples, and that each result is directly callable without a second schema lookup. This adds concrete behavioral context 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?

The description is moderately sized but well-structured, starting with the core purpose, then usage scenarios, then return details, and ending with when to call it. Every sentence provides useful information, though it could be tightened slightly without losing meaning.

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 adequately explains the return value: it returns top-N tools with names, descriptions, full input schemas, and curated examples. It also explains the 'call first' behavior. For a simple discovery tool with one required parameter, this is complete.

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%, and each parameter already has a detailed description with examples. The tool description adds little beyond what the schema provides, but it does reinforce the natural-language nature of the query and mentions the limit parameter's role in returning 'top-N'. This matches the baseline of 3 for high coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('tools'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by framing it as a discovery tool that returns the option set, with the explicit instruction to 'Call this FIRST when you have many tools available.'

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 says when to use it: 'Use when you need to browse, search, look up, or discover what tools exist' and explicitly instructs to 'Call this FIRST when you have many tools available and want to see the option set.' It does not mention when not to use it, but the 'FIRST' guidance implies it is preliminary to direct tool use.

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