search_metadata

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

With no annotations, the description covers core behavior like case-insensitive name matching and UID return, but lacks details on pagination, error handling, or empty results. It is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 concise, using a clear Args format with no extraneous text. Every sentence adds value.

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 presence of an output schema and the tool's straightforward search nature, the description is largely complete. It could mention that results are only UIDs and that limit applies.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains each parameter: query (text), object_type (enumerated list), limit (max rows). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema.

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 searches metadata collections by name and returns UIDs, with concrete verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that list entire collections or fetch specific entities.

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 implies the tool is for searching metadata by name across multiple object types, but does not explicitly state when to avoid it or provide alternatives. The sibling list offers context for differentiation.

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