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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it returns full text, author, line count, and notes the limitation 'searches titles only, not poem body text.' 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?

Two sentences, immediately stating action and scope. No filler. Front-loaded with the verb 'Search' and resource 'PoetryDB'. Highly efficient.

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 no output schema, description partially compensates by listing return fields. However, it omits default limit, pagination, and how the author parameter combines with title. These gaps reduce completeness for a search 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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description provides a usage example ('The Road Not Taken') but does not add new parameter info beyond the schema. The interplay between title and author is not explained.

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 searches poems by title or partial title and returns specific fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_poem_lines and list_authors, but does not explicitly mention the author parameter, which could cause confusion.

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 implies usage when searching by title but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like get_poem_lines or when not to use it (e.g., for full-text search). No exclusions are given.

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