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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it retrieves live catalog data, includes no coverage/availability checking, and warns against price estimation. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded with the primary action and scope, followed by exclusions and a pricing rule. Each sentence contributes, though 'Read-only.' is redundant with the annotations.

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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter and rich annotations, the description conveys what the response contains (prices, units, add-ons, required parameters), scope, and the source of truth. No need to document return structure beyond this.

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 only parameter (category) has full schema documentation with an enum and a clarifying description, so the schema already carries the semantic burden. The description does not need to add parameter syntax or format details.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lists') with a clear resource ('SzuruSzuru's upholstery, carpet, rug and mattress cleaning services') and geographic scope, making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also explicitly states what it does not do, which helps distinguish it from siblings like check_service_area and check_availability.

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 explicit when-not-to-use guidance: it does not check coverage or availability, and directs the agent to check_service_area and check_availability for that. It also instructs the agent never to estimate prices, instructing reliance on the live catalog.

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