autotask_search_expense_reports

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It only states 'search with optional filters' and does not disclose what the response contains, how pagination works (beyond pageSize), default behavior when no filters are given, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no output schema.

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 very short (6 words) and front-loaded, but it lacks any structural elements like bullet points or separation of concerns. While concise, it omits important details that could be included without adding length, such as result format or usage hints. It is minimally adequate.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return value structure, default filter behavior, or how to handle pagination beyond the pageSize parameter. For a search tool, this is a significant gap that could lead to incorrect agent execution.

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% with well-described parameters (status, pageSize, submitterId). The description adds 'optional filters' but no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate because the schema already handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 'Search for expense reports with optional filters' clearly states the verb ('search') and resource ('expense reports'), and the tool is distinguished from siblings like autotask_get_expense_report and autotask_create_expense_report. However, the description is brief and could more explicitly contrast with these related tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like autotask_get_expense_report for retrieving a single report. The description only mentions optional filters without explaining scenarios where filtering is beneficial or when pagination is needed. The lack of usage context reduces its utility for an AI agent deciding between sibling tools.

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