ine_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden; it usefully discloses that it searches the 'catalogue of key indicators' (a scope limit) and returns varcd codes. However, it omits pagination behavior and what the limit parameter controls, and gives no auth/rate 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?

Front-loaded with the core action and examples, then the return/next-step guidance. The raw "Args:" block is slightly informal but each sentence carries useful information.

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-value explanation is not required, and the description correctly points to ine_indicator as the follow-up. Yet with three parameters at 0% schema coverage, the undocumented limit and thin behavioral detail leave a gap for full completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains lang well ("PT" more complete wording, "EN") and conveys query semantics via keyword examples, but leaves the limit parameter entirely undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb ("Find") and resource ("INE indicators") with keyword-based scope and concrete example queries. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling ine_indicator by noting it returns varcd codes to pass to that tool, so an agent can route correctly.

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?

Clearly says to use this to discover indicators by keyword and names the alternative (ine_indicator) when you already know a code, including that codes can be sourced from www.ine.pt. It gives a clear usage context and alternative but stops short of explicit when-not guidance beyond the known-code case.

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