organization_endpoint_publisher_operating_systems_search

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only mentions 'Returns events' but does not state whether the operation is read-only, any authentication needs, or pagination behavior (although from_ and size parameters are present). The claim that q, from, size are required contradicts the input schema (which lists no required parameters), further confusing the agent.

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 short and front-loaded, but repetitive (includes the full tool name and endpoint). It could be more concise by removing redundancy and focusing on unique aspects.

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?

Given 7 parameters and no output schema, the description only covers three parameter names without explaining their purpose or the return format. This is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly, especially with similar sibling tools.

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. However, the description incorrectly states that q, from, size are required (schema shows they are optional with defaults null). This misleading information harms usability. No additional meaning is added for other parameters like sort, group, includeFields, or body.

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 'Returns events' and specifies the HTTP endpoint, but does not clarify what type of events or how the search works. It is clear enough for a basic search operation but lacks specificity to distinguish from similar sibling tools like organization_endpoint_publisher_product_versions_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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as organization_endpoint_group_search or organization_publisher_operating_systems_search are not mentioned, nor are any conditions for using this tool over others.

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