angi_search_pros

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

Annotations mark this as readOnly and idempotent, but the description adds substantial behavior context: return fields (ratings, review count, percent-recommended, years in business), pagination behavior (10 per page), slug requirements, and the absence of zip-code filtering. This is far beyond annotation baseline.

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?

Five focused sentences: purpose first, then return details, usage prerequisites, pagination, and a critical limitation. Every sentence adds distinct value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description enumerates the exact returned fields including per-dimension ratings, review count, percent-recommended, years in business, service area, and amenities. It also covers pagination, prerequisite slug resolution, and the location limitation, making it complete for a search tool.

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 covers all 5 parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying that trade and city are Angi slugs requiring resolution, and explains page is used to walk through results at 10 per page, providing value beyond the property descriptions.

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 uses the specific verb 'Find', identifies the resource as 'home-service pros on Angi', and scopes it to 'a trade in a US city'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like angi_get_pro (single pro) and angi_get_reviews (reviews).

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?

It explicitly instructs resolving trade and city slugs with angi_list_trades and angi_list_cities first, and notes the zip-code filter limitation. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like angi_get_pro for single-pro lookups, but gives clear context.

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