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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds return-content expectations, but it does not disclose behavioral details like default pagination, ordering, or search semantics beyond what the schema already states.

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 short and front-loads the main action, with no extraneous fluff. It loses slight ground because 'Use `search` to find by keyword' partially duplicates the schema's description of the `search` parameter.

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?

For a low-complexity list tool with an output schema and strong annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. The main gap is that 'Use `search`' is ambiguous: an agent could read it as a reference to a sibling tool like `search_content` rather than the `search` parameter.

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 `limit`, `offset`, and `search`. The description only echoes the `search` parameter without adding new semantics such as case sensitivity, matching rules, or interaction with pagination.

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 ('List'), a bounded resource ('all residential remodeling services'), and the fields returned. The qualifier 'residential' differentiates it from the sibling `list_commercial_services`, and the description is consistent with the tool name and title.

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 a broad catalog-listing use case and mentions using `search` to filter by keyword, but it does not explicitly name alternatives such as `get_service` for a single service or `list_commercial_services` for non-residential offerings. No clear 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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