search_live_tickets

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'live' and 'recent date window' but does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, the meaning of 'live', or how the date window is applied. This leaves significant unknowns for a search tool.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words and front-loads the verb 'Search'. However, it could benefit from a more structured presentation, such as mentioning key parameters or example usage.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and several siblings, the description is under-specified. It does not explain the return format, the meaning of 'live', or how to construct the query, leaving the agent without enough context to reliably invoke the 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It references a query fragment (mapping to 'query') and a recent date window (likely 'months'), but the 'limit' parameter is completely undocumented. The phrase 'recent date window' is vague and does not clarify the parameter's 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 the tool searches live Zendesk tickets using a Zendesk search query fragment and a recent date window. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_live_ticket_detail (which retrieves a single ticket detail) and report-generation tools.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies a search use case but does not mention exclusions or when to prefer sibling tools like get_live_ticket_detail or run_ticket_report.

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