Global NetBox Search

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent hints. Description adds that it aggregates top hits and dispatches queries in parallel. No contradictions, and adds useful context beyond 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?

Excellent structure: one-line purpose, usage guidance, then Args list, then Returns. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded with key 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?

For a read-only search tool with 4 parameters all documented, description includes return format guidance and follow-up suggestions. Annotations provide safety profile. No gaps.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description's Args section adds context like default of 5 for limit_per_resource and 'Use json when chaining follow-up tool calls' for response_format. Provides helpful nuance but schema already does heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states 'Fuzzy search across sites, racks, devices, interfaces, prefixes, IPs, VLANs, and VRFs' and distinguishes from sibling get/list tools by being a global cross-resource search. It also gives specific use cases like unknown object 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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when the user gives a name, hostname, partial identifier... and you don't know which object type they mean.' It also suggests follow-up with netbox_get_<resource>. Could mention when not to use, but otherwise strong.

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