autotask_search_ticket_notes

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

The description discloses a behavioral trait beyond annotations (none provided): the API threshold issue. However, it does not detail other behaviors such as pagination or return format, but the warning is highly valuable.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by critical usage guidance. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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?

The tool lacks an output schema, and the description does not explain the return structure. However, given the input schema coverage and the behavioral warning, it provides enough context for correct usage. The missing output details are a minor gap.

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 explains both parameters. The description adds no additional semantic value for parameters beyond implying the ticketId is required, which the schema already specifies.

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: 'Search for notes on a specific ticket.' This is a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like autotask_get_ticket_note (which retrieves a single note) and autotask_create_ticket_note.

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 explicitly advises when to use the tool and when to be cautious: 'Iterating across many tickets trips Autotask's per-integration API threshold — scope the parent list first.' This provides critical guidance on API rate limits and best practices.

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