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 filter landscape but says nothing about pagination behavior, result counts, or ordering defaults, which a 20-parameter search tool with paging would benefit from.

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 well-formed sentence with the resource up front and the filter set trailing. No filler; it could barely be shorter without losing the filter enumeration.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations carry the safety and open-world context. For a pure search endpoint, this description plus schema gives an agent everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so all 20 parameters are already documented in the schema itself. The description's filter list roughly mirrors the schema and adds no syntax or value-format detail (e.g., price presets vs price_min/max), 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 a specific resource (1stDibs handbag and purse listings) and even enumerates the filter surface. Clear enough to call, and it distinguishes itself from the detail-oriented siblings like firstdibs_product and firstdibs_categories, though it never names those siblings.

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 explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance or routing to alternatives such as firstdibs_categories or firstdibs_designers for slug lookup. Usage is only implied by the generic search framing.

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