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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior. The description adds the required scope ('estimates.read'), which is valuable auth context, but it does not mention pagination behavior or that unknown filter keys are refused—details left to 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and immediately followed by the required scope. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundant or filler content.

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 a fully described nested filter schema and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the essential purpose and auth requirement. It could be more complete by distinguishing this from sibling list/get/search tools, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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 all seven parameters, including the complex nested filters object, are fully documented in the schema. The description lists the same filter categories but adds no syntax, format, or behavior beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Search estimates') and enumerates the filter dimensions, so the tool's purpose is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like sellsy_list_estimates or sellsy_get_estimate, which keeps it from a 5.

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 prerequisite 'Needs estimates.read' is useful usage context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this search tool versus list_estimates, get_estimate, or the generic sellsy_search. Usage is implied by the filter enumeration rather than stated.

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