search_executions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns a JSON array of matching execution summaries, which is useful given there is no output schema, but it says nothing about result caps, pagination, or auth requirements. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Three sentences, no filler, with the core purpose front-loaded and the sibling routing second. Every sentence contributes a distinct fact (what, when-to-use, what it returns).

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?

With no output schema, the description steps in with a return-shape statement, and the six filters are fully documented in the schema. What is missing is any note on result limits or ordering, which matters for a search tool that can match many executions. Close to complete for this complexity level.

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 every parameter is already documented with type and ISO 8601 / example values. The description only restates the filter categories (status, trigger type, time range) without adding syntax or edge-case semantics. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (pipeline executions), plus the scoping dimension (across an application) and the filter axes it supports. It explicitly names the sibling it is not — list_executions — so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Contains an explicit 'use this instead of list_executions when...' clause with the selecting condition (finding executions matching specific criteria). This is exactly the when-to-use vs alternative guidance the dimension asks for.

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