search_devices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden and falls short: it doesn't confirm read-only behavior, describe the result shape, mention pagination, result caps, or supported filter operators beyond the schema's two examples. For a search endpoint, the absence of any result-limit or matching-semantics detail is a real gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though the brevity edges into under-specification for a tool with sibling alternatives.

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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter, no output schema), so the schema does most of the work. Still, the description leaves the list-vs-search distinction and any result-set behavior unaddressed, which matters given list_devices sitting next to it.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the single 'filter' parameter with two concrete examples. The phrase 'filter syntax' in the description adds almost nothing beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('devices'), so the basic operation is unambiguous. However, it never distinguishes this from the sibling tool list_devices, leaving the agent to guess whether searching and listing differ in filtering capability or result scope.

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 list_devices or get_device, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer that 'search' means server-side filtering, which is a guess rather than a documented rule.

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