autotask_search_contracts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states 'Search for contracts' but does not disclose read-only nature, pagination behavior, rate limits, or any side effects. The minimal description fails to provide behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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 a single sentence with no extraneous words. It is appropriately concise, though it could be slightly more informative while remaining brief.

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 schema covers all parameters and there is no output schema, the description is minimally functional but incomplete. It lacks mention of return format, pagination, or typical usage context. A search tool with optional filters would benefit from a brief note on output or behavior.

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 fully describes all four parameters with coverage at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'optional filters', and the schema already explains each parameter clearly. No extra semantics are needed.

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 contracts in Autotask with optional filters. The verb 'search' and resource 'contracts' are specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling search tools (e.g., search_tickets, search_companies) beyond the resource name, which limits clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when to use optional filters, or differences from other search tools. This leaves the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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