search_lessons

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, confirming safe read behavior. The description adds that results show specific linked items (corrective actions, etc.), providing useful behavioral context but not addressing any potential side effects or authentication needs.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's main action and output. It is concise and front-loaded with the key verb and resource.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by listing what is shown in results. With 0 required parameters and 4 input fields (3 described in schema), the description adequately prepares an agent, though it could elaborate on filtering behavior.

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?

With 75% schema description coverage, the schema already documents three parameters. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as how 'category' or 'tags' filter results. It lists output fields but not parameter effects.

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 searches promoted lessons and returns associated items like corrective actions, lifecycle state, etc. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'retrieve_lessons' by specifying 'promoted', though 'promoted' could be defined further.

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 implies usage through the query parameter behavior (empty for recent lessons) but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to sibling tools. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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