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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that the tool returns informational excerpts and is not a binding quote, which is useful, but it does not describe potential limitations, whether results are always found, or any other operational behavior.

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 two short sentences that immediately convey what the tool does and the key caveat about non-binding results. Every word earns its place, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential selection and invocation needs. It explains the purpose, the input type, and the nature of the output, though it could briefly mention what happens when the query has no match.

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 schema already provides full parameter documentation with a description and examples, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds minimal semantic value beyond restating that the query is a service or phrase, which is already covered by the schema.

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 action ('Find context') and the resource ('public Oleba renovation price-list page'), making the tool's purpose understandable. It also indicates a distinct non-binding nature, but it does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like get_prices, which could be similar.

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 a reasonably clear context for when to use the tool: when looking for informational context about a service or phrase on Oleba's price-list page. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools or state when not to use it, aside from the implied boundary that it is not a binding quote.

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