search_entities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the required scope ('entities.read') and the API path, which is genuine auth context, but says nothing about pagination behavior or result shape.

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?

Two compact sentences with zero padding, and the core action is front-loaded. The endpoint reference is slightly incidental but harmless.

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?

Covers purpose, scope requirement, and the endpoint for a 6-param read tool. However, with no output schema, the description gives no hint of what a result contains (entities, cursor), leaving the agent to infer the return contract.

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 83%, and the description adds nothing beyond restating that a selector is required. The selector syntax and the next_page_key ignore-other-filters behavior are already in the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (monitored entities), and names the mechanism (selector) plus the underlying endpoint. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like find_entity_by_name or get_entity.

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 permission requirement ('Needs entities.read') is useful, and searching by selector implies discovery use. But there is no guidance on when to use this versus find_entity_by_name or get_entity, which are the obvious alternatives for entity lookup.

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