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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool generates a plan, persists state across calls, and returns a session_id. This is adequate transparency, though it doesn't mention any side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits.

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?

The description is three sentences, each providing unique value: purpose, output explanation, and usage guidance. It is front-loaded with the core action and has no superfluous content, making it efficient and clear.

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?

Given the lack of output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does, what it returns, and how to proceed. It covers the primary concerns for a session creation tool. Minor missing details like plan specifics are acceptable as they may be covered by sibling tools.

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?

The input schema describes all 3 parameters with 100% coverage, including default values and constraints. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema (e.g., 'Explicit intent override' is already in schema). Baseline score is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'Create' and the resource 'search session', specifying it persists across multiple tool calls, generates a plan, and returns a session_id. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by directing usage instead of origingrid_plan+execute_batch for persistent state.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance: 'Use INSTEAD of origingrid_plan+execute_batch when you need persistent session state across calls' and instructs to call origingrid_search_session_execute with the session_id. This clearly defines when and how to use the tool versus alternatives.

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