search_smallcases

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the return shape and parameter effects (e.g., include_private default behavior). It does not mention rate limits or side effects, but for a search tool, this is acceptable.

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 well-structured: a concise purpose statement followed by a bulleted list of parameter details. Every sentence adds value, and the format is easy to parse.

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 complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), the description covers all return fields and parameter options. It also explains the behavior of include_private and the default sort. There is no missing critical information.

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 provides thorough explanations for all 7 parameters, including valid values (e.g., volatility: low/medium/high), examples (e.g., query: 'gold'), and default behaviors (sort: popularity).

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 / screen published smallcases from the public catalog,' using a specific verb+resource. It also lists the return fields, making it distinct from siblings like get_smallcase (specific smallcase) and compare_smallcases (comparison).

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/screening and contrasts with sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide direct alternatives. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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