search_research_runs

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. Discloses case-insensitive search across all string fields, filter operators, sort syntax, and ID prefix ('rr_'). Lacks explicit read-only statement but implies safe operation.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every word adds value. No redundancy or fluff.

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 no annotations and presence of output schema, description is fairly complete: covers search behavior, filters, sorting, and default _name. Mentions ID prefix for identification. Slight gap in explaining lack of required parameters.

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%, yet description adds meaning for all 5 parameters: query (free text), filter (object with operators), sort (descending with '-'), limit (default 20), _name (default 'research_run'). Compensates fully.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches research_runs with text query and/or structured filters. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_research_run (single), list_research_runs (likely unfiltered), and delete_research_run.

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?

Explains when to use text query vs structured filters, and mentions sorting with '-field' for descending. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but context is clear enough for an agent to differentiate.

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