search-all

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint as false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating it is a search across types, missing details like pagination or that results may be partial (open world).

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded. However, for a tool with 4 parameters and no schema descriptions, it may be too brief, sacrificing essential information. No wasted words, but completeness is lacking.

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 tool's complexity (4 params, 0% schema coverage, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain how parameters work, pagination via cursor, the range of item types, or what the response contains. The annotations cover safety, but the description omits critical usage context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain the purpose and constraints of the 4 parameters. However, it provides no parameter details. The meaning of 'term', 'limit', 'cursor', and 'itemTypes' must be inferred from names and schema types, and the enum for 'itemTypes' is ambiguous (single string vs. multiple).

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 'Search across supported Pipedrive item types' clearly states the tool's function: it searches multiple item types. The verb 'search' and the resource 'supported Pipedrive item types' are specific, and the tool is distinguished from siblings like 'search-deals' which target a single type.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search-deals' or 'search-persons' is provided. The name 'search-all' implies cross-type usage, but the description does not state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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