autotask_search_projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (25 per page, page parameter) but omits other behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, error handling, or output format. The pagination detail is useful but insufficient for full transparency.

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, each earning its place: first states purpose, second provides pagination guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded, and easy to parse.

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 rich schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is fairly complete for a search tool. It explains pagination and search scope. However, it could mention return fields or sorting, but overall adequate for the complexity.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions pagination defaults already captured in schema descriptions. Thus, it meets the baseline without extra value.

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 projects in Autotask, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling search tools (e.g., autotask_search_companies), so agents might not know when to choose this over others.

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 mentions pagination defaults and how to use the page parameter, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other sibling tools (e.g., get_project, list_projects). No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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