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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it delivers: it discloses the 31-day window limit, the hard cap of 200 on max_results, accepted date formats, and the return shape (parsed filings plus HKEx-reported total). These are non-obvious constraints an agent needs to call the tool correctly.

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 four tight sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and followed by parameter constraints and return behavior. Every sentence contributes necessary information, and backticks are used cleanly to reference parameter names.

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 search tool with four parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly. It covers inputs, constraints, filtering behavior, and the return value, leaving no critical ambiguity.

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 description coverage is 75%, and the description compensates for the undocumented max_results by explaining it caps both fetching and returning with a hard cap of 200. It also clarifies stock_code filtering with concrete examples, adding meaning beyond the schema's generic 'Optional HKEx stock code'.

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 is specific: it names the verb 'Search', the resource 'live HKEx filings', and the key scoping dimension (date window). This naturally distinguishes it from siblings like get_filing, which fetches a single filing, and get_server_info, which is about server state.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: to search filings by date, optionally filtered by stock code. However, it does not explicitly contrast with get_filing or state when one should prefer a sibling tool instead, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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