document_intelligence_search_documents

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

With no annotations, the description partially covers behavioral traits by mentioning routing under JWT, tenant, and company scope, but it fails to disclose whether the tool is read-only, modifies data, or has any rate limits or side effects. Critical behavioral context is missing.

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 and to the point, with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the mechanism (routing) and parameter intent. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values, but it fails to explain what kind of documents are searched, how results are structured, or common use cases. The tool's complexity and the many siblings demand more context than provided.

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 schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It describes 'message' as a free-text objective and 'inputs' as an optional JSON string of structured inputs, adding meaning beyond the schema's default values and titles. However, the explanations are minimal and do not cover format or constraints.

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 runs a domain agent action named 'search_documents' but does not clearly explain what searching documents entails. It lacks a concise verb+resource statement and does not differentiate from sibling tools like the generic 'search_documents' 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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'document_intelligence_chat' or the generic 'search_documents'. The description does not specify context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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