autotask_search_quotes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states it's a search tool with optional filters, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose critical details like pagination handling (beyond the 'pageSize' parameter in schema), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the return format looks like (especially since there's no output schema). The description adds minimal context beyond the basic operation.

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, efficient sentence: 'Search for quotes with optional filters'. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and wastes no words, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place.

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's complexity (a search operation with 5 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return structure, pagination behavior beyond 'pageSize', error conditions, or how search results are ordered. For a search tool with multiple filters, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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%, with all 5 parameters well-documented in the input schema (e.g., 'companyId' for filtering by company ID). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond stating 'optional filters', which is already implied by the schema. This meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without extra value from the description.

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's purpose as 'Search for quotes with optional filters', which specifies the verb (search) and resource (quotes). It distinguishes from other quote-related tools like 'autotask_get_quote' (which likely retrieves a single quote) by emphasizing search functionality, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other search tools like 'autotask_search_companies' beyond the resource type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to prefer this over 'autotask_get_quote' for single quotes or other search tools for different resources, nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is implied only by the name and description.

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