autotask_search_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (25 results per page default, use page parameter for more), which is useful. However, it doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what the return format looks like (only that it 'returns 25 results per page'). For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence states the core purpose, second adds crucial behavioral detail about pagination. Every word earns its place, and information is front-loaded appropriately.

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?

For a search tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but has clear gaps. It covers the basic purpose and pagination behavior, but doesn't explain search scope, result format, or how to interpret results. With no annotations and no output schema, more context about what 'search' actually means and what gets returned would be helpful.

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 the schema already documents all 6 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it mentions the page parameter and default page size, but doesn't explain search semantics, filtering logic, or how parameters interact. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Search') and resource ('tasks in Autotask'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on tasks rather than other entities like companies or tickets, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other search tools (e.g., autotask_search_tickets).

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 mentions pagination but doesn't specify when to use search vs. get operations, or how it differs from other search tools in the sibling list. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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