autotask_search_company_notes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral transparency burden. It discloses a critical rate-limitation behavior ('trips Autotask's API threshold') that goes beyond the schema. However, it omits other traits like read-only nature or error handling.

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 consists of two sentences, each serving a purpose: the first states the core functionality, the second provides critical usage context. No redundant words or filler.

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?

For a simple search tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose and a key constraint (API threshold). It could be improved by hinting at return values, but given the tool's simplicity, it is largely complete and actionable.

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%, with both parameters already fully described (companyId: 'The company ID to search notes for'; pageSize: 'Number of results to return...'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Search for notes on a specific company,' which defines the action and resource. It lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools like autotask_get_company_note, but the verb 'search' implies broader retrieval, making it sufficiently clear.

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 warns against iterating across many companies due to API thresholds and advises to 'scope the parent list first.' This provides clear context on when to use the tool, though it does not name alternative tools for broader searches.

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