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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the storefront-pinning scope, which is genuinely useful context, but discloses nothing about what suggestions look like or how they differ by type.

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 sentence with the domain scope front-loaded and zero filler. Every element earns its place.

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 all three parameters are covered by the schema plus annotations for safety. The remaining gap is explicit usage guidance, which is minor for a low-risk suggestion endpoint.

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 q, limit, and types (with allowed values product/collection/query) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which is the correct baseline when the schema does the work.

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+resource: 'predictive search suggestions' for the PSA Team Store. The parenthetical pins the scope to https://store.psacard.com, so an agent knows exactly which storefront this covers. It doesn't explicitly contrast with the other psastore_* tools (products, collections, store), but its function is unambiguous.

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?

'Predictive search suggestions' implies typeahead/autocomplete usage, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives. No sibling search tool exists for this store, so routing is not a concern, yet the trigger condition is left implicit.

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