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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool 'Returns ranked results with pricing,' which is useful behavioral context. Although it doesn't explicitly state it's read-only, the verb 'Search' strongly implies a non-destructive query, and the added output detail is beyond the schema.

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 three short sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action, then adds key behavior and usage guidance in a compact, well-structured format.

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 search tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior, usage context, alternative tool, and key output characteristics. It doesn't detail every parameter, but the schema covers those. It could mention pagination or default limits, but it's sufficient for selecting and invoking the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful nuance by explaining the semantic search capability (relating to the 'need' parameter) and contrasting with category browsing (relating to 'category'), plus mentioning pricing which connects to max_budget_cents. This enhances comprehension beyond 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 tool 'Search the Remno marketplace for services' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool ae_list_services by noting it is for semantic search vs category browsing, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly states 'Use for semantic search — for browsing by category, use ae_list_services.' This provides clear when-to-use guidance and names an alternative, exactly as recommended.

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