ow_replays_search

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

The description adds a meaningful caveat that player nationality/identity does not imply match server region, which helps prevent misinterpreting region filters. Read-only/non-destructive behavior is covered by annotations, so the description needs less behavioral detail.

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 short sentences with no filler; every phrase adds meaning. The caveat is compact and valuable.

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 complex 16-parameter search schema, the description gives only a high-level summary and one caveat. It omits output shape, common usage, and how filters interact, so it is not complete enough for confident use.

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 phrase 'stored identity/region/evidence' provides broad context for filter fields, but most of the 16 parameters are left unexplained. No detail is given for tier vs tier_min, playable_status, uploaded_after, refresh, player_pool, or ranker_status.

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 action—find public replay codes—and indicates filtering by identity, region, and validation evidence. It is distinguishable from replay retrieval by 'search' and 'public replay codes,' though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools.

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?

No explicit guidance about when to use this search versus sibling tools such as ow_replay_get or ow_rankers_search. The region caveat offers context but not selection criteria.

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