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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open world. The description adds context about return format ('Returns entity ID, label, description') and data license ('CC-0 public domain (Wikidata)'). It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope. No unnecessary words, every sentence provides value.

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 low complexity and presence of output schema, the description covers purpose, return value, data license, and sibling tool reference. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand when and how to use it.

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 100%, so the schema already documents parameters well. The description does not add significant new meaning beyond giving example queries ('Tesla', 'Barack Obama'), which are already implied by the schema descriptions.

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 'Search 100M+ structured entities in Wikidata' and lists example entity types (people, companies, places, concepts). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'wikidata.entity' by noting 'Use IDs with wikidata.entity for full details'.

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 implies usage: use this tool to search, then use wikidata.entity for full details. It also notes the data is CC-0 public domain. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives beyond the sibling.

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