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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety profile is covered. The description adds that listings are 'normalized' and limited to upcoming/live auctions, which is useful context, but says nothing about pagination, result count, or the default status behavior beyond what the schema states.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope and filter set are stated immediately. It is efficient, though so terse that it omits routing information an agent would want.

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 values need not be described, and annotations carry the safety profile. For an 8-parameter aggregator over a rich site, however, the description is thin: it doesn't mention the status defaulting to 'upcoming' or how to reach the historical archive, information the agent must dig out of the schema.

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% with unusually detailed param docs (month facet rules, status defaulting to 'upcoming'). The description merely restates four of the eight filter dimensions (country, category, month, auction type), adding no syntax or format detail beyond 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+resource ('Bonhams auction search') scoped to 'normalized upcoming/live auction listings', and names the filter dimensions. It clearly separates this from item-level tools like bonhams_lot_search, though it never explicitly differentiates from the sibling auction tools.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no alternates, and no conditions. It never tells the agent when to reach for auction_search versus bonhams_lot_search or bonhams_auction_detail, leaving selection entirely to inference from the name.

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