autotask_search_service_call_ticket_resources

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency. It only mentions 'search,' implying read-only, but fails to disclose pagination behavior, default ordering, response format, or any required permissions. The schema includes a pageSize parameter, but the description adds no additional behavioral context.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence that front-loads the verb 'search' and resource. Every word contributes to the purpose, with no wasted language.

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 no output schema and three optional parameters, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the returned data looks like (e.g., list of assignments with IDs), how filters combine, or any default behavior. This leaves an agent uncertain about the tool's full capability.

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%; all three parameters have clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score 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 it searches for 'resource (technician) assignments on service call tickets,' specifying the exact purpose. It distinguishes from sibling search tools like 'search_resources' or 'search_service_call_tickets' by focusing on the assignment relationship, though it could be more precise about the output.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'search_resources' or 'search_service_call_tickets,' nor does it discuss prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions.

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