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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and scope profile is covered. The description adds only that matching is by name, with no mention of pagination behavior, result limits, or what a hit contains.

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. It is efficient, though it is arguably too terse for the query semantics it could clarify.

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, annotations, and full parameter coverage, the description need not explain returns. It is minimally adequate, but for a search tool sitting beside a detail tool it leaves routing and result-shape questions open.

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% – 'q' and 'page' are both documented in the schema, including the 1-indexed default. The description adds no semantics beyond that, 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), resource (company/supplier), and scope (by name), so an agent knows it queries ImportYeti's company index. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling importyeti_company, which looks like the detail-lookup counterpart, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

No guidance on when to use this search versus importyeti_company (the entity-detail sibling), nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The phrase 'by name' implies the query mode but nothing tells the agent when this is the right entry point.

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