Search Lessons

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is already known. The description adds a little context by specifying that results include linked data like prevention rules and gates, but it does not disclose behaviors such as default query behavior, scope handling, or inclusion of shared lessons.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb 'Search' and contains no waste. It provides essential information efficiently.

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's complexity (7 parameters, a nested scope object, and no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not describe return format, how scope affects results, or how it compares to related search tools like retrieve_lessons, leaving significant gaps for an agent to infer.

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 71% (5 of 7 parameters have descriptions), but the tool description does not clarify the unannotated parameters (scope, category) or add any semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. The description focuses on what is returned, not on parameter meaning.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') with a resource ('promoted lessons') and enumerates the returned data ('corrective actions, lifecycle state, prevention rules, gates, and next harness fixes'), making its purpose unambiguous and distinguishing it from siblings like retrieve_lessons.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as retrieve_lessons or search_thumbgate. There are no explicit exclusions or context signals for choosing this tool.

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