autotask_search_ticket_attachments

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full responsibility. It discloses the per-query behavior and iteration warning, but does not mention safety (read-only), authentication needs, or rate limits. The iteration advice is valuable 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?

Two concise sentences with no unnecessary words. First sentence states purpose, second provides essential usage guidance. Highly efficient.

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?

For a simple search tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose and usage pattern. It could discuss response structure or pagination behavior, but the iteration advice adds completeness. Missing output schema is not the description's fault.

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 both parameters already described in the schema (ticketId and pageSize with default/max). The description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond the iteration implication, so baseline 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 states 'Search for attachments on a specific ticket', clearly specifying the verb (search), resource (attachments), and scope (on a specific ticket). It distinguishes from sibling tools like autotask_get_ticket_attachment (get one) and autotask_create_ticket_attachment (create).

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?

Explicitly advises 'each parent triggers a separate query — scope the parent ticket list before iterating,' providing when-to-use (single ticket) and when-not (many tickets without scoping). This guides the agent to avoid excessive queries.

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