air_search

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description correctly focuses on additional behavioral context: the required scope for authorization. This adds value without contradicting annotations.

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 two sentences, each providing essential information: the core function and a key usage constraint. No redundant words; structure is front-loaded with purpose.

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 the 100% schema coverage and presence of annotations, the description is largely complete. It covers purpose and authorization scope. Minor gap: no hint about response format or pagination, but not critical for a search tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptive parameter names and comments. The description does not add extra meaning beyond 'full-text search', which is aligned with the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as no additional parameter details are needed.

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 tool performs 'full-text search across orgs, domains, and projects', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on individual entities (e.g., air_list_projects, air_get_domain) by emphasizing cross-entity search.

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 includes the required scope ('search:read scope') and notes it's part of 'fullPipeline preset' but not in 'assessmentRunner', giving context on when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the siblings provide implicit alternatives.

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