Find the website template for a trade

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: it operates from a server-held catalog, makes no network call, and returns no matches (rather than forced) for out-of-scope trades. This reinforces and complements the annotations without contradiction.

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 description is concise and front-loaded, consisting of three sentences that efficiently convey purpose, usage, and limitations without redundancy. Every sentence adds value.

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 that there is an output schema (the context indicates 'Has output schema: true'), the description does not need to detail return values. It adequately covers the tool's purpose, usage context, limitations (no forced matches), and the fact that it uses a local catalog. For a tool with two well-documented parameters and a closed set of templates, this is fully complete.

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% with both parameters documented. The description adds meaning by explaining that 'industry' is the trade and 'needs' is optional, and it describes the output parameters (demo link, store link, prices, match words). This provides additional context beyond the schema's 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 clearly states the verb 'rank' and the resource 'Upshift's 14 website template lines'. It specifies the output (best three with demo link, store link, prices, match words) and distinguishes from sibling tools like site_audit and quote which serve different purposes.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use when someone asks what a website for a given trade should look like or cost.' It also notes that it returns no matches for trades outside the 14 lines, providing context for when the tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, though siblings are different enough that exclusion is implied.

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