search_passives

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses search behavior, node_type filter, return fields (id, stats, allocated, pathDist), and notes pathDist's condition. Lacks mention of rate limits or authentication, but read-only nature is implied.

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 concise (four sentences), front-loads the purpose, and conveys essential information without verbosity.

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 (which likely details return fields), the description covers key outputs and usage. However, it lacks mention of pagination or the limit parameter's effect, which is a minor gap 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains node_type with allowed values and query usage ('by node name or stat text'), but does not describe the limit parameter or query format. Partially covers the parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('active build's passive tree'), clearly distinguishing from siblings like get_passive (retrieval by ID) and optimize_passives (optimization).

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 using this tool for searching and then using the id with alloc/dealloc, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to search_items or search_mods.

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