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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining the 'public' category and disclosing certifications, prevailing wage compliance, and Small Works Roster eligibility—details beyond the schema.

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 purpose and output are front-loaded in the first sentence. The certification detail is somewhat long but directly supports the 'public' category semantics, so it earns its place without becoming unwieldy.

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 description is complete for a read-only, optional-parameter list tool: it names the output, covers category semantics, and references eligibility context. It does not discuss alternative sibling selection explicitly, but the output schema and annotations cover the remaining operational details.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by clarifying what the 'public' category means and providing examples of commercial categories, while limit/offset remain adequately covered by the schema.

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 and resource: 'List commercial construction services with slugs and citable page URLs.' It clearly differentiates this tool from the generic sibling list_services by scope (commercial/public works) and by naming the output format.

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 scope and enumerates filter categories, including the special meaning of 'public.' However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over list_services or other sibling list tools, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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