autotask_search_tickets

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals the max page size, which is helpful, but omits pagination mechanism, rate limits, authentication requirements, or behavior when no results are found. More detail is needed for full transparency.

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 extremely concise, consisting of just two short sentences. Every word adds value: the action, key filters, sibling reference, and pagination limit. No extraneous information.

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's 11 parameters and lack of output schema, the description provides only basic context. It mentions pagination but not how to navigate pages (e.g., page parameter). It lacks examples, typical use cases, or guidance on combining filters, leaving gaps for effective agent use.

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 high (91%), so the baseline is 3. However, the description mentions filters for 'queue' and 'priority' that do not appear as parameters in the schema, which is a minor misalignment. The description adds little meaning beyond the schema itself.

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's action ('Search tickets') and lists key filter dimensions (company, queue, status, priority). It also distinguishes this tool from a sibling by directing users to 'autotask_get_ticket_details' for full data, providing a clear purpose differentiation.

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 gives a pagination limit ('Max 500/page') and hints at when to use the sibling tool for full details. It provides clear context for usage but stops short of explicitly listing exclusions or alternative scenarios, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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