search_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns 'matching entity headers with key attributes' and includes defaults and limits, but omits behavioral traits like read-only nature, authorization requirements, or response structure beyond headers.

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 well-structured with a concise summary followed by an Args list. Each sentence provides essential information without redundancy. The summary could be slightly more compact, but overall it's efficient and front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and parameters adequately but lacks usage guidance and behavioral context (e.g., read-only, pagination behavior). An output schema exists, so return value details are not needed, but the absence of when-to-use advice reduces completeness given the many siblings.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds crucial meaning to each parameter. It explains query as free-text, type_name with examples (e.g., 'hive_table'), classification with tag examples (e.g., 'PII'), and explicitly states limit max (100) and offset for pagination. This compensates for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 tool searches for entities in Apache Atlas using basic search, listing the resource types (tables, columns, processes, etc.) and criteria (keyword, type, classification). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like dsl_search or quick_search, missing a clear contrast.

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 provides parameter details but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It says 'basic search' but doesn't specify when to use dsl_search (likely more advanced) or quick_search. Agents lack context for tool selection.

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