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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that results are restricted to active listings and that an empty array means no matches, and it explains parameter interdependencies (lat/long pairing, radius_km dependency, distance-sort dependency). However it says nothing about result limits, pagination, or any auth/permission requirements 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 tightly packed sentences with zero filler; the core purpose is front-loaded and each following clause covers a distinct conditional rule rather than restating the schema.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the description still adds the empty-result semantics. It is complete enough to invoke correctly, with the only gap being result-limit/pagination behavior that neither the description nor the schema addresses.

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 every parameter is already documented in the schema and the baseline is 3. The description adds the cross-parameter constraint that distance sorting requires an origin and that radius_km requires both coordinates, but offers no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope qualifier ('Search active Community Board listings') plus the filterable dimensions. It does not name or contrast with siblings like search_nearby, so an agent must infer the boundary from the geo-radius wording.

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?

Gives clear conditional guidance: supply both latitude and longitude to calculate distance, add radius_km to limit, use distance sorting only with an origin, relevance for title matches, newest for recency. It never states when to prefer this over search_nearby or get_listing, so it stops short of full when-to-use guidance.

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