autotask_search_tickets

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose whether the operation is read-only or any other behavioral traits. It only mentions pagination behavior. For a search tool, it should explicitly state it's a read operation.

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 three sentences, all relevant and well structured. It is concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and each sentence adds value.

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 11 parameters and no output schema, the description should mention what the response contains (e.g., ticket summaries). It only covers pagination, leaving the return format unclear. Incomplete for a complex search tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context about default page size and pagination, but the schema already describes each parameter well. Minimal added value beyond the schema.

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 'Search for tickets in Autotask' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_ticket_details' by advising to use that for full data on a specific ticket, making its scope clear.

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?

The description explains when to use this tool (for searching tickets) and suggests an alternative ('Use get_ticket_details for full data on a specific ticket'). Pagination details are provided, but it does not mention when not to use it or other alternatives among siblings.

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