everything_search_advanced

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'filtering and sorting options', which are already visible in the schema. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, whether it requires specific permissions, how it handles network or service dependencies, or what the return format is. This is a significant gap for a tool with multiple configuration options.

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 only one sentence, which is concise but not appropriately sized for a tool with seven parameters. It lacks any structure or front-loading of key information, and the brevity primarily reflects under-specification rather than efficiency. It does not 'earn its place' by adding substantial value.

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?

This is a complex tool with seven parameters, an enum, and no output schema. The description provides almost no context beyond the word 'advanced', failing to explain why one would choose this tool, what the results contain, or any constraints (e.g., default behavior, performance considerations). Given the tool's complexity and the absence of annotations, the description is severely incomplete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all seven parameters are individually documented. The description's mention of 'filtering and sorting' adds a high-level summary but does not provide any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'Advanced search with filtering and sorting options', which clearly indicates a search operation and distinguishes it from the sibling 'everything_search' by the 'Advanced' qualifier. However, it does not specify what resource is being searched (e.g., files, folders, the Everything index), relying on the tool name for context. The verb is present but the object is vague, making it clear yet not fully precise.

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 its sibling alternatives. It does not mention that basic search should be used for simple queries, nor does it explain the advantage of the advanced version beyond its name. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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