GNQL Metadata Query

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds behavioral context: returns only metadata (no raw data), supports pagination via scroll token, and describes output formats including the structuredContent always being full JSON. No contradictions.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and differentiation, then logically expands on usage, pagination, and output formats. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 tool has 5 parameters, 100% schema coverage, output schema exists, and multiple siblings, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, differentiation, query syntax support, pagination, quick mode, format options, and output behavior. It is complete for informed use.

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% with descriptions, but the description adds significant meaning: explains 'quick' returns only IP and classification, details CSV columns, and notes that the text response differs from structuredContent. This goes well beyond the schema.

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 verb ('Search') and resource ('GreyNoise data'), specifies the return type ('IP metadata without raw scan data'), and distinguishes from sibling gnql-query by noting it is 'lighter and faster'. This leaves no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 description explicitly tells when to use this tool: 'Use this when you need IP classification, tags, and metadata but not raw scan details.' It also compares to gnql-query and mentions pagination via scroll token, providing clear context for selection.

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