IndieStack

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds valuable privacy context ('never raw queries, never conversation context'), external profile management options ('View or delete your profile at...'), and operational dependencies ('after a few searches').

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?

Well-structured with clear paragraph separation between purpose, privacy policy, usage guidelines, and parameters. Every sentence adds unique value, though the privacy and profile management details make it slightly longer than minimal.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (relieving the description of return value documentation), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, privacy implications, usage timing, and parameter semantics for a 2-parameter read-only operation.

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 documenting both parameters in the Args section: 'category' includes specific examples ('analytics', 'auth', 'payments') and omission behavior, while 'limit' specifies the valid range (1-10) and default value.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Get') + resource ('recommendations') + mechanism ('based on your search history'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'recommend' by emphasizing the personalized, history-driven nature of the results.

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?

Provides explicit temporal guidance ('Use this after a few searches') and concrete user query triggers ('when the user asks "what else is out there"'), giving the agent clear signals for when to invoke the tool.

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