Search Many

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true). The description adds genuinely non-derivable behavior: companies are searched sequentially so throttled sources pace themselves, and companies with no board hits land in `unresolved` rather than failing the batch. That failure semantics is useful context beyond the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by execution and error-handling specifics. Every sentence carries information; only slight tightening is possible (the throttling rationale could be one clause shorter).

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the description is complete enough for a read-only batch search: it defines scope, execution model, and partial-failure handling. It could note source prerequisites but leaves nothing critical to guesswork.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all five parameters and the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing per-parameter beyond the schema, though it does clarify the `unresolved` output bucket, which is return-side rather than parameter-side.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: "Search several companies and return one merged list." The word "several" signals the batch distinction versus a single-company search (e.g. the sibling search_jobs), but it never names a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by "search several companies" – batch is the raison d'être – but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative named among search_jobs, find_board, or source_status. The agent must infer that this is the multi-company variant.

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