netintel_route_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does most of it: it discloses the free-tier rate limit (60 searches/hour), the ranking dimensions (fit, real paying demand, health, price), and what each result contains (URL, price, inputs, plain-words reasons). It stops short of stating auth/permission needs or whether results are cached, keeping it out of the top band.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the core action and ranking scope lead, cost and the routing hint follow. The final clause about route_recommend earns its place as routing guidance, though the sentence packs several ideas tightly.

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 two-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description supplies everything needed: what it searches, what it returns, the cost/rate limit, and the natural next tool. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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 description coverage is 100% and the schema already documents 'query' with an example and 'limit' with range and default, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 (find/rank) and resource (x402 pay-per-call API endpoints from the Coinbase Bazaar catalog), explicitly scoped to 'ANY provider (not only NetIntel)'. It draws a clean line against the closest siblings by naming netintel_route_recommend's live health-check role, so an agent can distinguish it without opening other schemas.

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 an explicit trigger ('Use it before paying an endpoint you do not know') and names the complementary sibling (netintel_route_recommend health-checks the top picks live). The when-to-use and the follow-up alternative are both stated, not implied.

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