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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that — that results include install instructions and require the LC Mod Installer on a Windows PC — but says nothing about pagination, result ordering, or how many results are returned per page.

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 tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and the practical caveat (Windows PC / LC Mod Installer) following. No filler, though the missing parameter detail would have been a better use of space than nothing.

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 7-parameter search tool with no output schema and zero schema description coverage, the definition is thin: filter semantics (game codes, category IDs, auto_only) and result-set behavior are undefined. It does state the return payload contains install instructions, which partially offsets the absent output schema.

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 0% across 7 parameters, so the description carries the full burden. It only explains 'q' ('words in title, description and tags'); game, category, sort, page, limit, and especially auto_only receive no explanation anywhere.

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: 'Search published LC mods', with the search scope ('words in title, description and tags') made explicit. It implicitly separates itself from mod_info (which would fetch a single mod) but never names the siblings, so differentiation is inferred 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?

Usage is only implied by the word 'Search' and the mention of returning install instructions. There is no statement of when to use this versus mod_info, collections, or how_to_install, and no note that the query is optional (all 7 params are optional).

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