search

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only states that the tool searches by text; it does not mention read-only behavior, default matching semantics, pagination behavior, or what results contain.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It states the essential purpose immediately and contains no wasted words.

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?

Despite rich schema details, the description alone is very sparse for a 7-parameter search tool with no annotations and no output schema. It lacks context about result composition, pagination, default behavior, and when to use filtering parameters, leaving the agent under-informed for invocation.

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 100%, so all parameters already carry detailed descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema handles the semantics.

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 identifies the verb ('Search'), the resource scope ('all issues, pages, and comments'), and the input type ('text'). This also differentiates it from the sibling tools, which are resource-specific getters and listers.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools, nor does it mention exclusions, prerequisites, or recommended filter combinations. The only hint is implicit in the word 'Search'.

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