ise_ers_search_downloadableacl

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It doesn't state whether this is a read-only operation, what filtering syntax is expected, pagination behavior, or what the response shape looks like. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage and no output schema, the behavioral transparency is thin — the agent is left guessing about filter format and response format.

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 no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose. However, it is arguably too brief given the tool's complexity — conciseness is achieved but at the expense of meaningful detail.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 20% schema coverage, the description is under-specified for a search tool with 5 parameters. It doesn't explain ERS filter syntax, pagination semantics, sort behavior, or what distinguishes search from list in this family. The deployment parameter is well-handled via pointing to ise_list_deployments, but the overall description leaves too many gaps for reliable agent usage.

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?

Only 20% of schema parameters have descriptions (only 'deployment' is described), leaving filter, sort, page, and size undocumented. The description mentions 'ERS filter expressions' which hints at the filter parameter's purpose, but doesn't explain the ERS filter syntax or how sort/page/size behave. With low schema coverage, the description should compensate but provides almost no parameter-level detail beyond the deployment hint.

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 states the tool searches/filters Downloadable ACLs with ERS filter expressions, which clearly identifies the verb (search/filter) and resource (Downloadable ACLs). However, it doesn't distinguish itself from the sibling 'ise_ers_list_downloadableacl' — both appear to enumerate dACLs, and the description doesn't clarify how search differs from list in this family beyond mentioning filter expressions (which the 'list' variant may also support).

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 'filter' parameter is alluded to ('with ERS filter expressions') and the deployment parameter mentions calling ise_list_deployments to see options. However, there's no explicit guidance on when to use search vs. list_downloadableacl vs. get_downloadableacl, nor when filtering is preferable to listing. The deployment reference provides some context but no exclusionary guidance against siblings.

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