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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so there is no safety contradiction. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: it matches name, tagline, and description and sorts most upvoted first. It does not mention pagination or result shape, but this is a minor gap for a simple read-only search.

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?

One sentence with no filler; the core action and scope are front-loaded, and the matching/ordering details are appended compactly. Every word earns its place.

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 two-parameter search tool with safety carried by annotations, the description covers scope, match fields, and ordering. The only minor gap is that it does not explicitly state the return shape, but the name and behavior make it reasonably inferable.

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?

The schema only documents 2 parameters with 50% coverage; the description enriches the query parameter by specifying the matched fields and result ordering, which is absent from the schema. The limit parameter remains self-explanatory via its default, minimum, and maximum in the schema.

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 ('Keyword search') and resource ('every product that has launched on LaunchOn.it'). It further scopes matching to name, tagline, and description, and specifies ordering, which clearly distinguishes it from the single-product and leaderboard siblings.

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 establishes clear usage context: use it for keyword-based discovery across all launched products. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of the top level, but the context is unambiguous.

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