autotask_search_products

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states 'search' without mentioning response format, pagination behavior beyond schema, rate limits, or side effects. The schema hints at pagination via pageSize but the description adds no context.

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 5-word sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It lacks structure or details that could aid comprehension, but it is not verbose.

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 simple search tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides a basic idea. However, it omits details like default behavior, result fields, and sorting. Given the long list of sibling search tools, more context would help an agent distinguish and use this tool correctly.

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 67%, with two parameters (searchTerm, pageSize) described. The description echoes 'optional filters' but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. For the undocumented isActive parameter, the description does not compensate.

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 'Search for products with optional filters' clearly states the action (search) and resource (products). It is specific to the tool's name and function, though it does not differentiate from sibling search tools like autotask_search_services or autotask_search_companies.

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, such as autotask_get_product for retrieving a single product or other entity-specific searches. No context on prerequisites or excluded scenarios is given.

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