search_bkp_codes

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool searches by keyword or number and provides no details about return shape, matching behavior, language effects, pagination, or result limits. It is not misleading, but it is minimal.

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 a single focused sentence with no filler. The resource and search mode are front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 tool is relatively simple and the schema covers both parameters, but there is no output schema and no annotations. The description does not explain what the search returns, whether matches are partial or exact, or any language-specific behavior. It is minimally viable but leaves notable gaps.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'keyword or number' phrasing mirrors the schema's 'Search term (keyword or code number)' and adds no new meaning. The lang parameter is already fully explained by its schema enum and description.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and identifies the exact resource ('BKP (Swiss construction cost plan) codes') plus the input mode ('by keyword or number'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling browse tools like browse_bkp_tree and from searches over other code systems such as CPV, NPK, and OAG.

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 guidance is given about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as browse_bkp_tree or search_cpv_codes. The description implies it is for BKP code lookup, but it does not state exclusions, preferred contexts, or how it differs from browsing the BKP tree.

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