evds_search_series

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and excels. It discloses the lack of server-side search, the index-building process, caching, automatic weekly rebuild, AND logic for multiple words, and the refresh parameter's effect. This is rich behavioral detail beyond typical descriptions.

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 well-structured: a one-line purpose, a brief behavioral note, and a clear Args list. Every sentence adds value, and the formatting is scannable. It is appropriately sized for the complexity of the tool.

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 output schema exists and the parameter semantics are fully covered, the description is complete. It addresses the tool's unique cost, caching, and refresh behavior, making the tool predictable and usable without further research.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate fully. It explains every parameter: query with examples, language values, limit with default, and refresh with its automatic weekly behavior. This fully bridges the semantic gap.

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 opens with 'Search EVDS series by name across every datagroup', which uses a specific verb (search), identifies the resource (EVDS series), and clarifies scope (across every datagroup). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like evds_series_list that likely operate within a single datagroup.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool: it searches across all datagroups and notes the cost of the first call. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for specific cases, stopping short of a full 5.

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