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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the purpose—it does not state what the tool returns (e.g., a list of deals), whether results are limited, or any pagination. With no output schema, this omission is a significant gap.

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 a single, focused sentence that immediately states the action and scope. It is front-loaded and free of unnecessary detail, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description should explain what the results look like (e.g., a list of deals) and any limitations. It mentions neither the return format nor pagination. The presence of sibling tools (get_deal, get_buying_guide) is not referenced, leaving the agent to guess when to use this tool. The description is too minimal for full contextual completeness.

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%, with both 'query' and 'category' fully documented including examples and enum values. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action (search) and the specific resource (PeanutButterJelly.io's crypto exchange and hardware wallet offers) with a method (by keyword). It is distinct from siblings like get_deal (retrieves a specific deal) and get_buying_guide (returns a guide), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that get_deal should be used for a specific deal or that get_buying_guide is for guides, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context. No exclusions or alternative routing are stated.

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