search_deep_search

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

With no annotations, the description fully shoulders the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the scope of search and the 'kind' tag, omitting behaviors like pagination, error handling, or rate limits, which are important for a search tool.

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 sentence, making it very concise. However, it could benefit from a brief breakdown of parameters or usage hints without sacrificing brevity.

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 existence of more specific search siblings and the lack of parameter descriptions, the description feels incomplete. It does not explain how results are returned or how to refine searches, leaving gaps for an AI agent.

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 0%, and the description does not elaborate on the 'query' or 'limit' parameters. The schema itself provides minimal info (e.g., 'limit' has a default), but the description adds no additional meaning about how to use these parameters effectively.

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?

Description clearly states it searches across entities, devices, areas, and automations with results tagged by 'kind', providing a clear verb-resource pair. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like search_search_entities, which reduces clarity.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus more specific search tools (e.g., search_search_entities, search_search_devices). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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