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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it operates on a closed registry or a prior hit subset, behaves like a structured grep filter, and is salon-only. These go beyond the structured annotations and align with openWorldHint=false.

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?

One dense, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates operation, resource, data source, and vertical scope without redundancy.

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 closed-world, read-only filter with an output schema, the description covers the essential invocation context: what is filtered, from where, and over which vertical. Some per-parameter detail is missing, but the overall behavior is sufficiently complete given the annotations and output schema.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It only clarifies salon_ids as a subset selector for prior search_salons hits. The other five parameters (price_range, neighborhood, open_tonight, publisher_id, accepts_reservations) receive no additional explanation beyond their names, leaving value/format ambiguities unresolved.

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 names a specific operation ('Structured /grep filter') on a specific resource ('salons'), and immediately scopes it to either the registry or a subset of prior search_salons hits. 'Salon-only vertical' clearly distinguishes it from sibling filter_restaurants and search_salons.

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 provides clear context: use this to filter the salon registry or to refine a prior search_salons result set via salon_ids. It does not name alternatives explicitly or state when not to use it, but the vertical scoping and reference to prior search_salons hits give practical guidance.

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