autotask_search_ticket_notes

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It reveals an API threshold and scoping requirement, which is good behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state it's read-only or describe response structure, which would make it a 5.

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 succinct sentences: first nails purpose, second adds critical usage warning. No wasted words, 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?

With two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose and usage guidance well. Minor gap: no mention of return format, but the tool is simple enough. Complete enough for agent selection.

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%, so parameters are well-documented there. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema for the parameters, but the scoping advice adds context. 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 clearly states the tool searches for notes on a specific ticket, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like autotask_get_ticket_note or autotask_create_ticket_note by focusing on search and scoping.

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 warns against iterating across many tickets due to API threshold, advising to scope the parent list first. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, with a named alternative implied (scoping first).

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