search_by_assignee

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

No annotations provided, and description mentions only searching assignee database without disclosing behavior like result format, matching logic, or rate limits. Insufficient for a search tool.

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?

Short and efficient description with no wasted words. Two sentences plus docstring-style Args. Front-loaded purpose.

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?

Adequate for a simple search tool, but missing output format details and any mention of sorting or filtering. No output schema exists to compensate.

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 has 0% description coverage, but description adds value by exemplifying company_name and specifying limit range and default, compensating for schema gaps.

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 it searches patents by assignee (company or organization) and differentiates from sibling tools like search_by_inventor or search_by_classification.

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 examples of company names and limit range, implying usage context, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives or prerequisites.

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