autotask_search_services

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

The description lacks behavioral details. It does not state that the tool is read-only, how it handles missing filters, or what the response format looks like. Since no annotations are present, the description should disclose these traits.

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 concise with a single sentence, but it is too vague to be truly useful. It earns its place by being short, but it could be more informative without losing conciseness.

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 and no output schema, the description should explain more about search behavior, default filters, and return structure. The minimal description leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool's full functionality.

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 description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. The 'isActive' parameter has no description in the schema, and the description does not clarify its behavior. The baseline for moderate schema coverage (67%) is somewhat lower, but the description fails to compensate.

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 services with optional filters' clearly states the tool's action (search) and resource (services). It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools by focusing on services, but does not explicitly differentiate from similar service-related tools like autotask_search_service_bundles.

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. With many sibling search and get tools, the agent would benefit from knowing, for example, to use this tool for broad searches and autotask_get_service for a specific service. The description offers no such context.

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