Search Lineage 2 private servers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It adds useful behavior beyond the schema: matching is case-insensitive and covers a specific set of fields. It does not mention ordering, pagination, result format, or that the operation is read-only, though search semantics imply safety.

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?

A single sentence front-loads the action and resource, then packs the search behavior into the rest. There is no redundant filler, and every clause adds relevant information.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it identifies the source page, query semantics, and matched fields. Minor gaps remain around what a returned match looks like and the default limit when limit is omitted, but these are not blocking for correct invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining what the query is matched against (name, website, rate, chronicle, description, labels) and that matching is case-insensitive, going beyond the schema's generic 'Text to match'.

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 states a specific action ('search'), a specific resource ('current L2 Calendar server page'), and the matching behavior (free text across name, website, rate, chronicle, description, and labels). It is distinguishable from siblings like list_servers and get_server, though it does not explicitly name or contrast them.

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 phrase 'by free text' implies when to use the tool: when a caller needs to match arbitrary text against multiple server attributes. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as list_servers or get_server, so routing guidance is only implied.

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