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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose two useful traits: matching is case-insensitive across any cell, and results are capped at 50 rows (a silent truncation an agent must know about). It says nothing about ordering, permissions, or what a returned row contains.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the dataset, match semantics, and result cap all appear immediately.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must stand alone, yet it omits result ordering, pagination behavior when more than 50 rows match, and the shape of a returned row. Adequate for a simple search but leaves real gaps for an agent planning multi-step retrieval.

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 coverage is 50% (only 'query' is described). The description compensates by defining the query semantics (case-insensitive, matches any cell) and by explaining the effective 50-row ceiling that governs the undescribed 'limit' parameter, so both parameters gain meaning 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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (rows of the Asbestos Survey Cost dataset), plus scope (cells containing the query, up to 50). An agent can tell it apart from dataset_row/dataset_top by the any-cell substring semantics, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives in a family that includes dataset_row, dataset_top, and entities_search. An agent must infer that this is the free-text lookup tool rather than an exact-row or ranked query tool.

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