search_cmdb_ci

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. However, it adds no additional behavioral context such as query syntax expectations, return format, or pagination behavior. The description provides no value beyond the 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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is appropriately sized for a simple read-only search tool, though it could include a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify what the search returns (e.g., full CI records, summaries) and any default behavior. It also lacks usage context. Given the tool's simplicity, the description is minimal but leaves key questions unanswered for an agent.

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% for both parameters (limit and query), so the schema fully documents their meaning. The description does not add further insight into how these parameters affect the search, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema covers parameter semantics completely.

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 verb 'search' and the resource 'configuration items (CIs) in the CMDB', which conveys the tool's core function. It does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like get_cmdb_ci, but 'search' implies a list/filter operation while get_cmdb_ci likely fetches a single item.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_cmdb_ci, list_relationships, or natural_language_search. The description gives no context for selecting this tool, so agents receive no decision support.

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