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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description usefully adds the default result ordering (newest activity first), the default exclusion of spam and trash unless explicitly requested, and the backing endpoint GET /tickets/search. It does not contradict the read-only annotation, and the filtering defaults are exactly the kind of behavior an agent needs.

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?

Two tight sentences plus an endpoint reference, with the scoping statement (full-text search over specific fields) front-loaded before the ordering and exclusion defaults. No filler or restated title content.

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 read-only search tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, ordering, default exclusions, and the endpoint; pagination is fully documented in the schema. Return shape is left implicit, which is the only minor gap.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds value the schema lacks: it flags that the query parameter uses SupportBee's dedicated search syntax, which the schema merely calls 'search keywords or query'. It also reinforces the spam/trash default semantics. The syntax itself is not explained, keeping this short of a 5.

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 (full-text search) and resource (tickets), names the searched fields (subject, body, requester), and specifies ordering (newest activity first). The 'search' verb clearly separates it from the sibling supportbee_list_tickets without needing to name it.

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 implies usage (full-text search with SupportBee's search syntax) and notes that spam/trash are excluded by default, but it never states when to prefer this over supportbee_list_tickets or supportbee_get_ticket. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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