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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the remaining burden is light. The description goes further by itemizing what comes back: sale posts, the seller's own wording, purpose, strengths, listed part numbers, and a quote link. It stops short of noting pagination, result caps, or auth, so not a full 5.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then examples, then the return payload, then the routing rule — a sensible order with no filler. It is a dense single block, but each clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description takes on return-value disclosure and does so adequately (post content, strengths, part numbers, contact link). For a single-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the description adds real nuance by clarifying the query accepts a product type, an industry, or a maker's line, and works in Korean or English, with multiple examples. That meaningfully extends the terse schema description.

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?

Specific verb and resource: 'Find Korean sellers and makers on BIDON by what they sell.' It explicitly scopes the tool to keyword/industry/line queries, cleanly separating it from lookups keyed on exact part numbers.

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?

States the triggering condition ('when there is no exact part number') and names the alternative with its own condition ('Call lookup_part when a part number is known'). When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both explicit.

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