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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by noting results are 'ranked' and 'grouped by type,' which is not visible in the annotations or 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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core scope and return format are front-loaded, and the usage guidance is compact but complete.

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, combined with a rich schema and a full set of safety annotations, gives an agent everything needed to select and call this tool correctly. Return value details are covered by the output schema, so no additional explanation is required.

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 all three parameters including examples and defaults. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond mentioning a 'single keyword query,' which is consistent with the schema but not supplementary.

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 ('search'), a clear resource ('all Kolmo content'), and enumerates the covered types ('services, projects, and blog posts'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the list_* siblings by naming the alternative approach it replaces.

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?

Gives direct usage guidance: 'Use this instead of calling list_services + list_projects + list_blog_posts separately.' This makes the when-to-use decision explicit and routes the agent away from less efficient alternatives.

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