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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and a closed-world scope, so safety is covered externally. The description adds that results cite statiko.io pages and yield document ids, which is genuinely useful behavioral context, though nothing about result volume or ranking is given.

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 short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the downstream handoff second. No filler or restated name/title material.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary, and the description still flags the id-based handoff to fetch. The remaining gap is the unaddressed overlap with the search_channels sibling, which an agent selecting between them would want resolved.

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?

There is a single parameter at 100% schema coverage, so the schema already documents 'query' as a free-text search string. The description adds no format, syntax, or query-construction guidance beyond that baseline.

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) and resource (tracked Telegram channels and trending stories) on a named service, Statiko. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from the sibling search_channels, which a reader may confuse with this tool.

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?

It implies usage by noting results feed the fetch tool (returns document ids), giving one useful handoff hint. However, it never states when to choose this over search_channels or get_trending_topics, so the routing guidance is only partial.

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