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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and open-world behavior are covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context by disclosing that results include a total matching count and an opaque pagination cursor, hinting at paged retrieval, but it does not describe page size, ordering, or rate limits.

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 dense sentence, front-loaded with the tool's identity and result contents, with no filler or repetition. Every clause carries information.

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?

For a read-only search with full schema coverage, an output schema, and safety annotations, the definition is nearly sufficient. The only gap is the absence of any usage guidance relative to siblings, which is minor given the structured coverage.

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 query, max_id, and department are already documented in the schema, including the cursor semantics. The description's mention of an opaque pagination cursor echoes rather than extends the schema, so 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 (Poshmark listings), and describes the result contents (normalized listing summaries, total count, pagination cursor). This distinguishes it from detail-oriented siblings like poshmark_listing and poshmark_closet, though the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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 never says when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., poshmark_category, poshmark_brand) or what query conditions apply. It describes output but gives the agent no routing or prerequisite guidance.

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