Search planets Star Wars

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only states 'by name' but does not reveal return format, matching behavior (exact vs partial), pagination, or case sensitivity. This is minimal transparency for a search tool, though it is not misleading.

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 a single concise sentence that gets to the point, though the phrasing 'in API' is slightly awkward and the 'Star Wars' mention is redundant with the title. It is efficient without being overly verbose.

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?

For a simple one-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description provides the core purpose but lacks details about return values or limitations. It is adequate for basic use but leaves gaps around expected results and edge cases, making it a minimum viable score.

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 already provides a clear description for the 'search' parameter ('Name of a planet in Star Wars Films'), giving 100% coverage. The description's 'by name' reiterates this without adding new details, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action (search) and resource (planets in Star Wars), with the parameter 'by name' adding specificity. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling search tools like search_films or search_characters, but the resource focus on planets makes the purpose clear.

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; you would use this tool to search for Star Wars planets by name. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools (e.g., 'use search_characters for characters') or any exclusions, so it falls short of a 4.

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