autotask_search_ticket_charges

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

The description adds important behavioral context about the cost and cap of unfiltered queries, beyond what the input schema provides. However, it does not disclose other traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, or authentication requirements. With no annotations, the description partially carries the transparency burden.

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 two sentences: the first identifies purpose, the second provides guidance. Every word serves a purpose, with no fluff or repetition.

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 no output schema and basic parameters, the description covers the key points: what charges are, recommended filter, and performance caveats. It is slightly lacking in describing the return format or structure, but overall sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the recommendation for ticketId and explains the cap on unfiltered queries, which adds marginal value but does not significantly deepen parameter understanding.

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 charges on a specific ticket and defines charges as materials, costs, or expenses. This distinguishes it from sibling search tools (e.g., search_tickets, search_time_entries) and related tools like get_ticket_charge.

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 recommends using ticketId and warns that unfiltered queries are expensive and capped at 10 results. This tells the agent when and how to use the tool effectively, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools for other scenarios.

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