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

The description states the return contents (project specifications, price, direct link, company contacts) and implies a read-only search operation, but does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, mention rate limits, or discuss permission requirements. Since annotations are absent, this is a moderate disclosure that goes beyond the schema but lacks depth.

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 a concise summary sentence followed by a well-organized parameter list. Each parameter earns its place with necessary detail, and there is no redundancy or fluff. The structure mirrors the schema parameter order, making it easy to map.

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 covers the search filters, return fields, and parameter defaults/limits, which is sufficient for a search tool with an output schema. It does not mention pagination beyond the limit parameter or sorting, but these are minor gaps given the output schema exists and the core use case is well described.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter with units and semantics: 'area_min: Minimum house area in square meters', 'material' with allowed values, 'budget_max: Maximum price in rubles', and 'limit: Maximum 20'. This is exactly the type of clarity needed for an 8-parameter tool with no schema-level 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 uses a specific verb 'Search' with a clear resource 'house building projects' and lists the key filters (area, floors, material, price). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_companies and get_project by focusing on the project search use case with multiple filter dimensions.

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 explains how to use parameters (e.g., 'Set to 0 for no limit') but provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where other tools like search_companies or get_project would be more appropriate.

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