search_bots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It doesn't disclose match semantics (substring, case sensitivity), result limits, pagination, empty-result behavior, or ordering. Only the searchable fields are hinted at.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, no filler. Slightly abbreviated but nothing wasteful.

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 should say more about matching behavior and result handling (limits, ordering, empty results). The name/description scope is there but the behavioral envelope is absent.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'query' parameter, giving a baseline of 4 for zero/one-parameter tools with full schema documentation. The description adds context that the keyword targets name or description, which is modest value beyond the schema's 'Search query keyword'.

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?

Clear verb ('Search') and resource ('Grok Bot agents'), with scope narrowed to name/description fields. It distinguishes itself from list_bots (no filter) and search_messages (different resource), though it doesn't explicitly name the alternative.

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?

Usage is implied by 'search ... matching a keyword', suggesting use when you have a keyword rather than browsing. But there's no explicit when-to-use vs list_bots or statement of what happens when no match is found.

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