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

Adds substantial behavioral detail beyond the readOnlyHint: stemming, synonym and typo handling, explicit return fields, and a clear statement that full text is not included and should be retrieved via markdownUrl. 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?

Three purposeful sentences, each earning its place: main action first, algorithm behavior second, return format and caveat third. No fluff and well 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?

With no output schema, the description covers the essential return values, algorithm behavior, and the absence of full text, which is sufficient for a simple search tool. Limit semantics and pagination are unspecified, but are minor gaps.

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?

Explains query semantics (word stemming, synonyms, typos), meaningfully enriching the otherwise undocumented query parameter. It does not describe limit's purpose, but the schema's min/max and the parameter name make it largely self-evident.

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 action ('search blog articles') and resource ('статьям блога'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on services, cities, and terms. The title 'Поиск по блогу' reinforces the scope.

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?

Implies usage context by comparing the algorithm to the site search line and describing exactly what is returned. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but sibling tool names make the selection unambiguous.

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