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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: the search is bounding-box based, market only selects a display locale, and no geocoding is performed server-side.

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 tight sentences: purpose first, parameter semantics second, hard constraint third. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema or annotations.

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 annotations cover safety. For a 7-required-parameter viewport search, the description supplies the essential missing pieces: what market means, that a bounding box plus center is required, and that geocoding must happen upstream.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it largely does: it enumerates market's allowed values (ca/fr/jp/uk/us), clarifies market is a locale not a filter, and explains that latitude/longitude plus north/west/south/east define the search area. It stops short of defining the precise center/box relationship or coordinate format.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource: searching Gucci's public store-map features, scoped to a viewport. It is clearly a different operation from a plain store listing, though it never names the sibling tools (gucci_store, gucci_stores) it should be chosen over.

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?

It states a real precondition — 'Supply a geocoded viewport; free-text location names are not resolved by this API' — and clarifies that market is a display locale, not a country filter. That prevents two common misuse patterns, but it never routes the agent to an alternative tool or says when not to use this one.

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