find_verified_listings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose key traits: it is strictly read-only ('can never surface unverified businesses and can never change verification status') and it enumerates returned fields (booking_url, machine-booking capability, endpoint health). It omits auth requirements, rate limits, and pagination behavior, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by behavior and then routing guidance, with no filler sentences. It is slightly dense across four sentences but each one carries distinct information.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what an agent needs: verified-only scope, immutability of verification status, and the shape of each result. It could say more about result volume or ordering, but nothing essential is missing.

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 100%, so all five parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the verified_only:true example for the sibling tool. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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+resource (find VERIFIED service businesses) and scopes it to the dfwmetro.net directory for booking. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling find_listings by noting it is the legacy verified-only path, so an agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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?

Gives explicit routing: 'new integrations should prefer find_listings with verified_only:true,' and tells the agent which field to use for which flow ('use booking_url for human-style booking flows; use capability endpoints only when present'). Both the when-to-use and the alternative are named.

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