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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context that the data is a crawled public catalog discovered from PitchBook's sitemap, but says nothing about rate limits, pagination behavior, or freshness beyond the schema's constraints.

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 the verb and resource first, followed by a scoping parenthetical. Efficient and free of padding, though the parenthetical is somewhat dense.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and all parameters are documented in the schema. The description supplies the dataset-content context that the structured fields lack, making it adequate for calling the tool correctly.

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%, so the schema fully documents all 10 parameters (q, page, sort, run_id, hq_state, hq_country, service_type, year bounds, page_size). The description adds no parameter-level detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (the PitchBook advisors dataset), and the parenthetical clarifies the content scope (advisor/service-provider profiles, overview, contact/HQ, serviced companies/deals/co-lenders). This distinguishes it from the broader pitchbook_* siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate from datasets_pitchbook_advisors_facets or _item.

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 explains what the dataset contains but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling facets/item tools that an agent must choose between. Usage is only implied by the 'Search' verb.

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