holded_search_operations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description only adds that results are "paginated summaries" — useful but thin given an output schema already exists to describe the return shape.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, no filler. Minor deduction for a stray line break splitting "paginated summaries" and for packing the filter enumeration into the same sentence as the core 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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description needn't explain return values. However, for a five-parameter discovery tool it leaves filter-combination semantics and any notion of what an "operation" record represents unstated.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It maps meaning onto three of five parameters (search, api, tag) but is silent on limit/offset beyond the word "paginated", and never says whether api/tag combine as AND filters with the free-text search.

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?

Specific verb plus resource: "Search the offline API catalog" with the searchable dimensions named (words, Holded api, tag). The word "offline" implicitly separates this discovery tool from the execution siblings holded_read/holded_write, though the siblings are never named explicitly.

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?

There is no explicit "use this when" statement and no alternatives are named, so the agent must infer that this is the discovery step before calling holded_get_operation or holded_read. The phrase "offline API catalog" hints at the pattern but does not state it.

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