ise_ers_search_allowedprotocols

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, how results are paginated, what the default behavior is when no filter is supplied, or what the response structure looks like. For a search tool operating on a resource, this is a notable gap.

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 concise sentence with minimal waste. It front-loads the core purpose and mentions the filtering mechanism. However, given its brevity, it could realistically have packed in more behavioral info without becoming bloated.

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?

With 5 parameters but only 20% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description does too little. It fails to explain the ERS filter expression format, return shape, pagination defaults, or when deployment is required. Compared to sibling search tools across the suite, this one provides minimal guidance for a resource with moderately complex filtering behavior.

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 only 20% (only the 'deployment' parameter is described). The description mentions 'ERS filter expressions' for the filter parameter but doesn't explain ERS filter syntax or the semantics of page/size/sort. The description adds some meaning for the filter parameter but leaves page, size, and sort unexplained.

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/filter Allowed Protocols with ERS filter expressions' clearly states a search/filter operation on the Allowed Protocols resource, distinguishing it from sibling list_allowedprotocols (likely a plain list) and get_allowedprotocols (single item). The verb+resource is specific and the ERS filter expression mechanism is named.

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 implies it's for filtered searching of Allowed Protocols but doesn't explicitly state when to use it vs ise_ers_list_allowedprotocols. No explicit when/when-not guidance or alternative tool names are given, though the sibling naming convention and mention of 'filter expressions' implies the use case.

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