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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds that results carry identity, address, coordinates, ratings and 'crawl-time availability' (a freshness caveat), but says nothing about rate limits, result caps, or auth. This is roughly on par with the calibration case where annotations carry the safety burden.

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 search scope is front-loaded, followed by a result-content summary and the workflow pointer. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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 17-parameter tool with fully documented schema and an existing output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, result content and workflow adequately without needing to restate parameters or return values. Only the overlap with the nearby/facets siblings is left unaddressed.

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% across all 17 parameters, so the schema already documents syntax, ranges and defaults. The description only restates the filterable facets at a high level and adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (Search) and resource (DoorDash store directory dataset), then enumerates the search dimensions (keyword, country, state, city, marketplace tag). It also distinguishes itself from the item sibling by framing itself as discovery 'before retrieving one store's full record.'

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?

Explicitly positions the tool as the discovery step that precedes fetching a single store's full record, giving clear when-to-use context. It does not, however, address when to prefer datasets_doordash_stores_nearby or facets, both of which overlap with its geo and tag filtering.

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