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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read operation, so the description carries a lower burden. It usefully discloses the return fields, including whether items can be bought on-site, but says nothing about pagination behavior, result caps, or default ordering despite the page and sort parameters.

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 tight sentences: the first states the operation and filters, the second states what comes back. No filler and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 does well to summarize the returned fields. However, for a paginated search tool it omits result-count limits, default sort and page size, which an agent needs in order to page reliably.

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 75%, with query, category, and sort already documented in the schema; the description only reinforces that keyword and category can be combined. The page parameter is undocumented in both places, though its meaning is obvious from the name.

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 and resource (search live listings on iamai.markets) and names the filtering dimensions (keyword and/or category). It is clear enough to distinguish from get_listing or create_listing, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with those 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?

Usage is implied by the name and by 'search live listings', and the 'and/or' phrasing implies both filters are optional. There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus get_listing for a specific item or list_categories for browsing, nor any stated exclusions.

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