Get Search Results

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful output-shape context (compact summaries by default vs raw detail pages) but says nothing about pagination behaviour, termination, or result counts, which are the real behavioral questions for a paging 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?

One sentence plus a qualifier, front-loaded with the core action and the default behaviour. No filler. The phrase 'raw detail-on-demand pages' is slightly jargon-heavy but still compact.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should clarify what comes back and how paging terminates. It hints at result granularity but omits total counts, exhaustion signals, or max limit context, leaving real gaps for a 4-parameter paging tool.

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 only 25%, with only search_id documented. The description compensates partially by explaining detail_level's default and intent, but limit and offset are left to the schema with no semantics beyond the verb 'page through'. Given the coverage gap, this does not fully compensate.

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 and resource: 'Page through an existing creator search.' The word 'existing' implicitly differentiates it from search_creators, which creates the search, though the sibling is not named. An agent can tell what it retrieves without opening the 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?

Gives a clear conditional rule for detail_level: default to compact summaries, use 'full' only for raw detail-on-demand pages. It doesn't state explicitly that search_id comes from search_creators or when to avoid the tool, but the operating context is clear enough to call it correctly.

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