glpi_search_knowbase

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions pagination and filters, which are behavioral traits, but does not disclose return format, default behavior, or any side effects. For a read-only search tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and mentions key capabilities. No wasted words, and it is appropriately sized for a simple search tool.

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 tool's simplicity, no output schema, and full schema coverage, the description is adequate. However, it could benefit from mentioning the return format or default pagination behavior, but for a search tool with clear parameters, it is minimally complete.

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 documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value by mentioning pagination (start, limit) and filters (filter), but does not elaborate on the language parameter or provide examples beyond what the schema offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 knowledge base articles, with a specific verb ('Busca') and resource ('artigos na base de conhecimento'). It distinguishes from siblings like glpi_search_faq and glpi_get_knowbase_item by focusing on search with pagination and filters, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 for searching knowledge base articles with pagination and filters, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like glpi_search_faq or glpi_get_knowbase_item. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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