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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety. The description adds context about free listings, tier-gating, and available filters, which is useful beyond annotations. However, it does not explain pagination behavior (cursor) or result limits.

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 three sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence immediately states the purpose, followed by a key fact (free) and then a concise list of features. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, filters, sort, and access control. It omits details about pagination and the ignored price_max_cents parameter, but overall it is reasonably complete.

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 57%, and the description adds meaning by summarizing filters (free-text, ticker, report_type) and sort options. It reinforces the schema's query parameter description and adds context about tier-gating but does not cover all parameters (e.g., limit, cursor) in detail.

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 the tool searches the catalog of published research reports, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_report (single report) and list_my_reports (personal), providing unique value.

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 gives clear context on when to use this tool—for searching reports with filters and sort—but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or note when not to use it. It implies usage through filter descriptions.

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