search_object

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of disclosure. It accurately describes the search behavior and label options but omits details like default limit, case sensitivity, and return format. Search semantics are understandable, but some behavioral specifics are missing.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, then lists the optional filter. Every word contributes meaning, 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?

An output schema exists, so return values are defined. The description covers the essential functionality for a simple search tool but does not explain the default label behavior or how the limit interacts with results. Given the tool's straightforward nature, it is sufficiently complete.

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 0%, and the description compensates well by explaining that 'term' is matched against name/objectid and enumerating allowed label values. The 'limit' parameter is self-explanatory from its name and default, though not explicitly described.

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 'Find' and the resource 'objects', specifying that it searches name/objectid by a term. It also provides the optional label filter with a list of possible values, distinguishing it from specialized sibling tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like run_cypher or other search utilities. The description implies searching by simple term, but lacks exclusions or alternative suggestions.

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