Search by name

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses useful behavioral details like ranking order (exact matches first, then prefixes, then event count), which goes beyond the schema. However, it does not state whether the tool is read-only or describe any side effects, though this is less critical 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, focused sentence that delivers the core purpose and ranking behavior without any fluff. Every phrase earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, and the description covers the essential search behavior. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it does not hint at the return format or pagination. It also does not clarify how this search relates to search_properties or search_events, leaving the context incomplete for an agent deciding between tools.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add semantic meaning to the parameters (q, type, limit) beyond what the schema already provides. The only implicit hint is that 'name contains the query' maps to q, but this is already in 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 tool finds world objects by name substring, with a specific verb 'finds' and resource 'world objects'. It distinguishes from siblings like search_properties and search_events by focusing on name. The ranking detail (exact, prefix, event count) further clarifies its 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 title 'Search by name' and description imply the tool is for name-based searches, but no explicit when-to-use guidance is given. It does not mention alternatives or conditions that would favor another search tool, so the usage context is only implied.

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