search_pages

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states that results include content previews, which is helpful, but omits details about sorting, pagination, default filtering, or the read-only nature of the operation. Minimal but not empty.

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?

The description is concise, with two sentences front-loading the main purpose and return behavior. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy.

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 simple search tool with fully documented parameters, the description gives a basic overview and return type. However, it lacks mention of default status filtering, limit handling, or behavior with no matches, so it is only minimally complete.

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 provides complete descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage). The description's mention of 'title keywords or content text' loosely aligns with the query parameter but adds no new detail beyond the schema's 'match against page titles and content'.

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 the action and target: 'Search pages by title keywords or content text.' It effectively distinguishes from sibling search tools for posts, streams, and thoughts, and from list_pages which likely returns all pages rather than matching ones.

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 use for finding pages by keyword but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over search_posts, search_streams, or list_pages. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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