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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: the upstream cap of roughly five proximity-ranked stores, the autocomplete backing, and the default-inclusive (non-pickup-only) result set — all of which affect how results should be read.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then caveats. Every clause carries decision-relevant information (scope of filters, result cap, absence caveat, pickup default) with no repetition of the name or schema.

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 and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description need not explain return values. It supplies the two things an agent would otherwise get wrong — the ~5-store cap and the non-pickup default — making the definition complete for calling this 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 baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning by clarifying that pickupOnly is opt-in and that results default to including delivery, which is not evident from the booleans alone; cuisine/tag and distance filters are only implied rather than defined 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 (Search) and resource (nearby DoorDash restaurants) and enumerates the filter dimensions covered (cuisine, DashPass, availability, pickup, distance). It does not name or rule out the close siblings doordash_search_autocomplete, doordash_explore, or doordash_feed, so an agent must infer which search surface to use.

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?

Gives clear operating context: results are not pickup-only unless pickupOnly=true is passed, and a store's absence is not proof it is off DoorDash. It stops short of naming alternative tools or stating when this tool should be avoided in favor of a sibling search/autocomplete endpoint.

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