clio_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions routing and authentication scope, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, whether it supports filtering or pagination, or what the output contains. This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or constraints.

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 short (3 lines) and front-loaded with name and routing info, which is good for conciseness. However, the brevity sacrifices clarity and completeness, making it less effective. It earns its place but omits essential details.

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 tool's complexity (generic search among many specific list tools) and the absence of annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not cover what is searched, how to use the arguments, or what the tool returns. The presence of an output schema (per context) is not reflected in the description.

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 only parameter 'arguments' is described as 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation,' with a default of '{}'. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds almost no meaning—no structure, valid keys, or example values. The agent cannot infer how to construct a valid search query.

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 states it is a 'search' operation for Clio, but it does not specify what entity or resource is being searched (e.g., contacts, matters, documents). Given the many clio_list_* and clio_get_* sibling tools, the description fails to distinguish what 'search' targets, leaving the agent unsure when to invoke this tool.

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 guidance on when to use clio_search versus the numerous clio_list_* or clio_get_* tools. The description lacks any context about scenarios, prerequisites, or alternatives, providing no help for an agent to decide tool selection.

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