search_questions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool returns only question stems and mentions the sample set. However, it does not disclose potential destructive behavior (likely none), authentication needs, or rate limits.

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 very concise and well-structured: a one-line summary, then arg specifications, then return info and cross-reference. No unnecessary words.

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 the simplicity of the tool (2 parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers purpose, parameters, return values, and the relationship to a sibling tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description adds essential meaning. It lists valid values for topic and difficulty and indicates that topic performs a substring filter. This is very helpful, though it could be more precise about matching behavior.

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 'Search practice questions' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'get_question' by noting that this tool only returns question stems, and hints/solutions require the other tool.

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 explicitly says to use 'get_question' for hints/solutions, providing a clear alternative. It also lists valid argument values, guiding when to filter by topic or difficulty.

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