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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context: the result includes full input schemas with curated examples, and each result is ready to call directly without a second lookup. This goes beyond annotation hints.

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?

Description is largely front-loaded with purpose and examples. Every sentence contributes, though the list of domains is somewhat lengthy. Overall efficient and well-structured for the amount of context provided.

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 tool discovery tool with a single query input, the description adequately explains the output (names, descriptions, schemas) and mentions the result limit. No output schema exists, so the description compensates by detailing what is returned.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description clarifies that the input is a natural language description and lists aliases for 'query', adding value beyond schema definitions. Examples further illustrate expected inputs.

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?

Purpose is explicitly stated: 'Find tools by describing the data or task.' The description gives specific domain examples (SEC filings, financials, etc.) and distinguishes from sibling tools by positioning it as a meta-tool to be called first when many tools are 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?

Usage is clearly indicated: 'Use when you need to browse, search, look up, or discover what tools exist.' It advises calling this tool FIRST to see the option set. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or provide alternatives, though the context implies it is a discovery tool preceding direct tool calls.

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