search_problems

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination support and filter criteria, which is adequate for a search tool. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens when no results are found, which would be helpful.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then lists filter criteria efficiently. No extraneous words or redundancy.

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 search tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the input filters and pagination but omits return format details (e.g., what fields each problem result contains) and pagination iteration guidance. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description summarizes the filter categories (categories, tags, difficulty, keywords) already detailed in the schema, adding no new semantic information beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 verb 'Searches' and the resource 'LeetCode problems', and lists multiple filter criteria (categories, tags, difficulty, keywords) with pagination support. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_problem and get_daily_challenge by focusing on filtered search.

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 for searching with filters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_problem for a specific problem by ID). No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided, leaving the agent to infer context.

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