search_error_reports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that results include reportText with stack trace, device info, and app version, which is useful behavioral context. It doesn't mention rate limits or failure modes, but the read-only nature of 'search' is implicit.

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, each earning its place. Front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds a critical usage detail. No wasted words.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains what's inside the reports. It covers filter usage and references sibling tools, but could mention result count or paging behavior explicitly. Overall, it's sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds a concrete filter example and references the issue name source, going beyond the schema's generic example.

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 'Search individual crash/ANR error reports for an app' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'search_error_issues' by focusing on individual reports and referencing the sibling for issue names.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on filtering to one issue using an issue name from search_error_issues, offering a concrete filter example. This clarifies when to use this tool and how it relates to the sibling.

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