search_entries

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds specific behavioral details: uses $containsi filter, case-insensitive, default fields if search_fields omitted. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, followed by mechanism and optional parameter guidance. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, destructiveHint) and the presence of an output schema, the description provides enough context to use the tool correctly. No missing information.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the search mechanism ($containsi) and the fallback behavior of search_fields. This justifies a 4.

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 for content entries by text query within a specific content type, using case-insensitive containment filters. It distinguishes from siblings like list_entries by adding search functionality.

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 explains when to use the tool (searching by query) and how to use search_fields or leave it empty for common fields. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to list_entries, but the guidance on parameters is clear.

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