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

Annotations already indicate safe, read-only, idempotent behavior. The description adds value by specifying the returned data format (compact summaries with question, description, IDs) and the default term behavior. 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?

Three sentences, each serving a specific purpose: describing the search capability, the return format, and default behavior. Front-loaded and concise with no redundant information.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what is returned (compact summaries) and the data source (Oyez). The default behavior and authentication ('Keyless') are also mentioned, making it self-contained.

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 clear parameter descriptions including examples and limits. The description adds minor context (e.g., 'filtered client-side' for name, exact term year example) but does not significantly extend beyond the schema.

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 it searches US Supreme Court cases from Oyez by term year and/or case-name substring. It distinguishes from siblings like cases_by_term (by term only) and get_case (by ID) by mentioning the search criteria and that results include IDs for get_case.

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 provides context for when to use the tool: searching by term and/or name. It notes default behavior (most recent term if no filters) and 'keyless' access. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like cases_by_term for term-only queries.

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