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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so 'never changes an account' largely repeats structured data. The one genuinely new behavioral fact is the result cap ('at most five guides'), which is disclosed nowhere else — a useful but singular addition.

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 front-loaded sentences with no filler; the purpose is stated first and the constraint second. The 'never changes an account' clause is slightly redundant against the annotations, costing it a perfect score.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials and adds the result cap. It remains incomplete on parameter semantics and on how search differs from the sibling guide-listing 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and both parameters are required, so the description carries the full burden — yet it says nothing about the 'query' string semantics or the 'locale' enum values (en/es/pt/id/tr). The enum is machine-readable but the intent of choosing a locale is left unexplained.

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 Waply public documentation') with a scoping qualifier ('public'), which is clearer than a bare name restatement. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_guides or get_installation_guide, though it never names them, so the differentiation is only implied rather than explicit.

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 gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention the obvious alternative (list_guides) for browsing rather than searching. An agent must infer the search-vs-list distinction entirely on its own.

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