monday_search_items

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

The description mentions routing through an invoke API but does not disclose read-only or destructive behavior, required authentication scopes, or any side effects. With no annotations, the tool's behavioral profile is almost entirely unclear.

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 but not effectively structured. It front-loads a generic path explanation rather than prioritizing functional details. While no words are wasted, the brevity comes at the cost of usefulness.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns or how to interpret results. The single parameter 'arguments' is opaque, and no examples or further context are given, making the tool nearly impossible to use correctly without external knowledge.

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 a JSON string for the connector operation, which adds minimal meaning beyond the schema. Given 0% schema description coverage, the description should provide details on expected keys (e.g., boardId, query) but does not.

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 only states it is a 'Monday connector operation search_items' without explaining what searching items entails. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like monday_list_items or monday_get_item, leaving the purpose vague.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as monday_list_items or monday_query_data. No context about prerequisites or use cases is provided.

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