Get Search Engines

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond stating it is a 'get' operation. Without annotations, it does not disclose read-only nature, authorization needs, error handling, or the relationship between project ID and site_id. The agent is left to infer safety and side effects.

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 at two sentences, with key information front-loaded ('Project Tool: Requires a project ID.'). Every word serves a purpose, though the project ID reference may be slightly misleading.

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 a single parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the return format, clarify the project vs site_id discrepancy, or provide sufficient context for proper invocation. The agent may misinterpret the required input.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter description 'Unique website ID' is provided. The description adds a redundant statement about requiring a project ID but does not clarify the mismatch with site_id. Baseline score of 3 applies as the description adds minimal value over the schema.

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 it retrieves a list of search engines employed by a project, using a specific verb and resource. However, there is a slight inconsistency: the description mentions 'requires a project ID' but the input schema parameter is named 'site_id', not 'project_id', which may cause confusion.

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 like PROJECT_addSearchEngine or DATA_getSearchEngines. There is no explicit context for when-not-to-use or mention of prerequisites beyond the implied site_id requirement.

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