Search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: the per-hit return shape (type, Gramps ID, summary, handle), page/total count, and the server-side failure mode for very long queries with a workaround. It stops short of pagination limits or performance notes, so not a full 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then routing, then return shape, then the alternative tool, then the failure caveat. Every sentence earns its place and the ordering matches how an agent decides and invokes.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description explains the return format, count, and the handoff to get_object for full records, plus a real operational caveat. Nothing needed to call this search tool correctly is missing.

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 query, page and pagesize are already documented (including the '*' wildcard and ranges). The description only marginally reinforces query semantics via the long-query advice; baseline 3 is correct when the schema carries the load.

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?

States a specific verb (find) and resource (records across ten named entity types) and explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings get_object and list_objects. An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and does not cover without opening a schema.

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?

Gives an explicit entry condition ("Start here when you have a name, place, title or other text but no Gramps ID") and names the alternative with its selecting condition ("To browse or filter one type by its fields ... use list_objects"). When-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are both stated.

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