search-actor-contents

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It describes the search features (text search, type filtering), return behavior (full details, targeting info for spells), and non-destructive nature. It lacks details on pagination or error handling, but for a search tool, this is sufficient.

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 concisely written in four sentences, each serving a purpose: purpose, efficiency comparison, features, and usage recommendation. No redundancy or filler. It is front-loaded with the main action.

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?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers the essential aspects: input behavior, output details (full details with targeting info), and use case differentiation. It could mention the output format more thoroughly, but it is complete enough for effective use.

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 100% and descriptions are provided. The description adds value by explaining the 'query' parameter searches name/description (case-insensitive), and the 'category' parameter for spells and items. It also clarifies that leaving 'query' empty returns all items of the specified type. This goes beyond the schema.

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 purpose: 'Search within a character's items, spells, actions, and effects.' It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get-actor' by noting it is more token-efficient and avoids loading the entire character. The verb 'Search' and resource 'character contents' are specific.

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 tells when to use this tool: 'Use this to find specific spells, equipment, feats, or abilities without loading the entire character.' It also implies when not to use by contrasting with 'get-actor'. The phrase 'More token-efficient than get-actor' provides clear guidance.

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