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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose that the query is discarded, which is a meaningful data-retention behavior, but it provides no information about return values, side effects beyond discarding, or whether the listed schema parameters are actually used.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The operation is stated first and the behavioral note second, making it appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

There is no output schema or annotations, and the description does not state what is returned, which parameter represents the search query, or how the input is expected to be provided. An agent cannot reliably invoke this tool correctly from the given information alone.

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?

All seven schema parameters have descriptions, but none of them corresponds to a 'search query,' and the tool description does not map its stated input to any schema field. Even with 100% schema description coverage, the descriptions appear unrelated to the tool's purpose, leaving an agent unable to determine which parameter should contain the query.

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 states a specific action, counting characters in a search query, and adds the useful detail that the query is discarded. It is clear about the tool's core function, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools by name.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of exclusions, and no conditions that would select this tool over a sibling. The only implied usage is 'when you need to count characters in a query,' which is not reinforced with any concrete scenario.

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