search_items

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

No annotations provided, and description fails to disclose search behavior (e.g., fuzzy matching, case sensitivity, pagination, or multiple results). Agent is left guessing how the search operates.

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?

Single concise sentence with examples front-loaded. No wasted words; every part contributes to understanding.

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?

Simple tool with one param and no output schema; the description covers the search capability. However, it omits details like whether searches are case-sensitive or support partial matches, which would fully close completeness.

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 describes 'query' as 'Search keyword', but description adds real-world meaning: items can be searched by product name or machine name, with concrete examples. This enriches semantic understanding.

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?

Specific verb 'search' and resource 'items' with explicit examples (product name, machine name) and examples like 'wheat', 'bakery', 'bread' clearly distinguish it from sibling tools like get_item or get_by_machine.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The examples imply usage context (search by name or machine), but no comparison with alternatives like get_item or get_by_machine.

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