search_npk_codes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic action. It omits critical behavioral details such as pagination, result limits, ordering, error handling, or what happens when no results are found. This leaves the agent with insufficient information to predict tool behavior.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose without extraneous words. It is appropriately sized for a simple search tool, though it lacks structured breakdowns (e.g., front-loading key terms).

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description should explain return values or behavior. It does not mention what the search returns (e.g., list of codes, details), pagination, or result count. For a search tool with two parameters, this is incomplete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds 'by keyword or number', which reinforces the schema's 'Search term (keyword or code number)' but does not provide new meaning or clarify format or constraints beyond what the schema offers.

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 'Search', the resource 'NPK (standardized positions catalog) codes', and the method 'by keyword or number', making it easy for an agent to understand the tool's purpose. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like browse_npk_tree (navigation) and other search tools targeting different code systems.

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?

While the description implies usage for searching NPK codes, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., browse_npk_tree for browsing hierarchy). No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations are given, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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