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

The description discloses partial matching behavior and suggests including parent names for better barangay results, adding some behavioral insight beyond the schema. With no annotations provided, it carries the burden, but it doesn't mention return format, pagination, or whether the operation is read-only, so it's minimal.

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?

Three concise sentences, each earning its place: purpose, partial matching + level filter, and a specific tip for barangay searches. No redundancy or superfluous information.

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?

The description gives useful guidance for common use cases but lacks information about output format, ordering, or error behavior, which is notable since there's no output schema. It covers essential usage but isn't fully complete for an agent that needs to interpret results.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds practical meaning by explaining the level filter's purpose and advising on query composition for barangay searches, which goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 tool 'searches Philippine geographic entities by name' with partial matching, giving a specific verb and resource. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'lookup' or 'list_by_type', so it's a clear purpose but without sibling comparison.

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 concrete usage context: use the level filter to narrow results and include the parent city/municipality name for barangay searches. However, it doesn't mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'batch_lookup' or 'lookup', so it lacks exclusions.

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