search_shayari

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions 'active' and 'owner-authorized' constraints, which is useful context for a search operation. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination, authentication needs, or what happens when no results exist. It is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the purpose and key constraints efficiently. This is an example of good conciseness.

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 tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not differentiate from search_research_shayari, does not explain optional parameters, and does not describe the result format. An agent would struggle to use it correctly without additional context.

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 only 33% (only 'query' has a description). The tool description does not explain the 'poet' or 'limit' parameters, nor does it clarify the expected format of the query beyond what the schema says. Given the low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 a specific action (search) and resource (Hindi Devanagari shayari text) with qualifiers 'active' and 'owner-authorized'. It distinguishes from siblings by implying filtering but does not explicitly name alternatives. It is not a tautology and provides a clear purpose.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus search_research_shayari or get_shayari. It implies a scope (active, owner-authorized content) but does not state conditions or alternatives. An agent would have to infer when to choose this over siblings.

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