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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the returned fields (name, slug, lowest price) and that richer price/period data lives in a sibling tool, which prevents an agent from expecting full pricing here. It stops short of covering auth needs, rate limits, or result-size behavior beyond the schema's limit default.

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?

Five short sentences, front-loaded with purpose then progressively detailing the handoff, query-less mode, and s2b filter. Dense but every clause adds routing or parameter information; not padded.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by naming the return fields and delegating price detail to the sibling tool. Combined with the fully documented schema and clear usage routing, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 already 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds genuine meaning: query accepts brand names or Korean free text, category can be used alone, and s2b_only means 'purchasable on 학교장터' — semantics beyond the terse schema strings.

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 ('finds AI/edutech subscription products purchasable by schools/institutions') with scope and coverage of multiple vendors named explicitly. An agent can distinguish this search tool from get_school_saas_product and the other siblings without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use get_school_saas_product for pricing/period options, omit query and pass only category when the brand is unknown, and enable s2b_only to restrict to School Marketplace listings. Both when-to-use and the alternative tool are named.

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