Get Searchable Fields

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

Annotations already mark tool as read-only and idempotent. Description adds behavioral details about output structure (grouped by scope, with type metadata), going beyond what annotations provide. No 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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately add differentiating guidance. No wasted words.

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 informational tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return structure (grouped, typed). Sibling list provides context. Minor gap: no mention of output_format parameter.

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 0% for the only parameter (output_format). The description does not mention this parameter or its default value or purpose, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use it.

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?

Clearly states verb 'list', resource 'searchable device fields', and adds structure 'grouped by scope, with per-field type metadata'. Directly differentiates from sibling 'get_device_metadata_fields' by noting it is richer and intended for constructing typed advanced-search queries.

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?

Explicitly contrasts with sibling tool ('Richer than get_device_metadata_fields') and tells agent to use this for 'constructing typed advanced-search queries', providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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