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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds the non-obvious rule that at least one filter must be supplied, which the schema does not enforce. Beyond that it discloses nothing about result limits, default ordering, or archived-record handling, all of which live in schema descriptions rather than here.

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 zero filler; the constraint is placed at the end where it is most likely to be read as an invocation rule.

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 a full output schema and annotations covering the read-only/open-world profile, the description needs only to state what the tool finds and the filter requirement, both of which it does. Richer guidance on defaults and pagination is unnecessary given the schema, though a pointer to the singular detail tool would make it fully complete.

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 already documents all 11 parameters in detail. The description names only five filter fields and adds no syntax or format guidance beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 (Pizza Hut restaurants) and enumerates the filterable dimensions. It is distinguishable from the sibling pizzahut_store (singular detail lookup), though it does not explicitly name that distinction.

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 phrase 'at least one filter is required' gives a concrete invocation prerequisite that the agent would otherwise miss, since the schema marks zero required properties. It does not, however, point to the sibling detail tool as an alternative when a single store is already known.

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