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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds that this returns predictive suggestions and that `types` selects what kinds of entities come back, but says nothing about pagination, rate limits, or result ordering. Adequate but thin beyond the annotations.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with zero filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the sibling-routing clause.

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 three-parameter read-only suggest tool with a full output schema, the description covers purpose, routing, and result scope. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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` (default 10, max 20), and `types` (product/collection/query) are fully documented in the schema. The description paraphrases these fields ('types selected by types; limit caps results') without adding syntax or format details beyond 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Fetch Rothy's predictive-search suggestions') and clarifies what the results contain (products, collections, or queries). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming rothys_product and rothys_collections, so an agent can route without opening other schemas.

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 gives explicit routing guidance: 'Use rothys_product for one item or rothys_collections for catalog groups.' This tells the agent when to prefer the alternatives, though it stops short of stating when this suggest tool is the wrong choice (e.g. for full result sets).

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