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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the search action without disclosing whether it is a read-only operation, what response structure to expect, or any special behavior for empty results or multiple matching criteria. The term 'tracked' adds slight context about the dataset but no behavioral traits.

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?

One short sentence fully front-loads the core purpose. No redundant words or restatements of the tool name.

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?

Despite a simple single-parameter signature, the tool is missing critical usage details: parameter syntax, whether the query is optional (0 required params), and how to relate to sibling tools. The absence of output schema and annotations makes the description insufficient for confident invocation.

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?

The schema has a single string parameter 'query' with no description (0% coverage). The description says search by sector/city/keyword but does not specify how the query parameter encodes these dimensions (e.g., free text vs. structured syntax, combinability). This leaves the agent guessing how to construct the argument.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'search' and identifies the resource 'tracked startups' with clear facets (sector, city, keyword). It distinguishes from siblings like list_cities/list_sectors which likely provide dropdown values, and get_startup_signal which may fetch details for a single startup.

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 clear context that the tool searches startups by sector, city, or keyword, but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over sibling tools or how to discover valid sector/city values using list_sectors/list_cities. No exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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