business_mapping_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It says nothing about read-only vs. mutating, side effects, rate limits, or return behavior. An agent would have no idea what calling this tool does.

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 two words, but this is under-specification, not conciseness. It lacks any substantive content while the tool is complex (24 parameters). There is no front-loading of key information because there is no 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?

With a large schema, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides zero helpful context. An agent cannot determine the purpose, expected inputs, or outputs, making the tool effectively unusable without external documentation.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning to any of the 24 parameters. It does not explain what parameters like 'query', 'match', 'statuses', or 'expected_version' mean, leaving the agent to guess from names alone.

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 is a tautology—it merely restates the tool name with no verb, resource, or scope. It does not distinguish this tool from closely related siblings like 'business_mapping_list' or 'search_paths'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus any alternative. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or examples that would help an agent decide if this is the right tool.

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