search_personal_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: searches over names/descriptions/tags, returns capped 'field — description' lines, never returns values, results ordered by relevance, and internal field name usage. It also provides user-facing instructions.

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 well-structured, front-loads the purpose, and each sentence adds value. It is slightly lengthy but clear. Could be trimmed slightly without loss.

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 presence of an output schema, the description doesn't need to detail return format. It covers search scope, non-return of values, sibling tool usage, and user-facing behavior. Complete for a search tool.

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 0%, so description compensates by explaining 'query' as a keyword search and 'limit' as a cap (default 20). It adds context about search scope but doesn't specify exact query syntax. Given two simple parameters, this is sufficient.

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 it searches fields by keyword over names, descriptions, and tags, and explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_personal_info (which retrieves a single field) and set_personal_info. It sets clear expectations that it does not return values.

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 identifies this as the primary discovery tool and instructs calling get_personal_info after. It advises not to volunteer other fields. While it lacks an explicit 'when not to use', the context with siblings makes usage clear.

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