search_spottypes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions searching a specific file but doesn't describe what the search returns (e.g., matches, snippets, full definitions), how results are ordered, whether it's case-sensitive, or any limitations. The description lacks essential behavioral context for a search operation.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information.

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?

For a search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the search returns (format, structure, or content of results), which is critical context for an AI agent to understand how to use the tool effectively. The lack of output information creates significant gaps.

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 schema already fully documents all three parameters (query, page, pageSize). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 action ('search') and target resource ('spottypes.txt file for spot animation definitions'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from some siblings by specifying the file type (spottypes.txt) but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other search_* tools that search different file types.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention when this search is appropriate compared to other search tools (like search_iftypes, search_invtypes, etc.) or when to use it versus general file operations like get_file_details or list_data_files.

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