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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safety profile; the description adds value by stating the return format (metadata and links) and defining the content domain. It does not discuss pagination or rate limits, but these are covered by the 'limit' parameter and are not critical for a search tool.

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 tight sentences with no fluff: action, scope, filter, and output/alternative. Front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence earns its place.

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 simple read-only search tool with full schema coverage, the description adequately covers what the tool does, the corpus scope, how to filter, and what results look like. It also mentions the companion dp_get_guide without needing an output schema.

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%, and the schema descriptions are already clear for all three parameters. The description only adds 'Filter by category,' which does not introduce new meaning beyond the schema; hence the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 Default Privacy's long-form guides and playbooks, with a specific verb and resource. It also differentiates from sibling tools by noting it returns metadata and links, and points to dp_get_guide for full content.

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?

It provides clear context about the corpus, how to filter by category, and explicitly directs users to dp_get_guide for full content. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other sibling search tools like dp_search_tools or dp_search_glossary, so exclusions are not fully spelled out.

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