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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds the 'same filters as search' scoping and the page*page_size<=10000 cap, which is useful, but those limits and the enum values are also restated from the schema rather than adding new behavioral context (no return shape, no counts-vs-documents distinction).

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, but the description redundantly duplicates the facet enum, gross_band enum, and the page/page_size text verbatim from the schema, adding length without new 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 20-parameter, one-required-facet aggregation tool with an output schema present, the description covers purpose, the critical facet enum, and the sibling routing. Return values needn't be explained given the output schema, so it is nearly 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 every parameter. The description repeats the facet and gross_band enums and the page/page_size rules without adding format or constraint detail 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 and resource: 'Returns terms-aggregation counts for one facet of the Box Office Mojo dataset.' It also differentiates the sibling search tool explicitly, so an agent can tell this is the facet-count endpoint rather than a document search.

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 scopes usage to one facet and routes plain searching to datasets_boxofficemojo_search. However, it doesn't say when a facet aggregation is preferable over merely paging search results, or that exactly one facet must be chosen per call.

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