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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure. It discloses that this is a search-result summary and not a full market census, which sets expectations about scope. However, it doesn't mention whether it mutates anything, requires prior search state, or describes output behavior, so it is only partially transparent.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a clarifying limitation. Every word adds value and there is no repetition or filler.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description omits parameter semantics and return value expectations (no output schema). Since the description does not explain how to use the parameters or what a summary looks like, it is incomplete for an agent that needs to invoke it 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage and the description does not mention either parameter ('text' or 'source'). It fails to explain what 'text' should contain (e.g., the category/capability query) or what values 'source' selects between. With no parameter guidance in the description, an agent has to infer meaning purely from the schema enum.

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 states a specific verb ('Summarize') and a clear resource ('current bounded xOmniMarket search results'), and clarifies scope with 'not an exhaustive market census'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_market by indicating this tool works on existing bounded results rather than performing a new search.

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 this tool is used when there are current bounded xOmniMarket search results to summarize, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives like search_market or compare_market_items. The exclusion of 'exhaustive market census' gives a slight hint, but no direct alternative routing is provided.

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