Buildium Search Endpoints

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the behavioral detail that it searches across all 462 operations and returns matching endpoints, which is useful. It doesn't describe result ranking or pagination, but with annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 short sentences with zero waste. The primary purpose and usage guidance are front-loaded, and the scope detail ('across all 462 operations') earns its place by conveying breadth. No redundant phrasing.

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 search tool with a rich output schema, annotations covering safety, and 100% schema parameter coverage, the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent when to use it and what it searches. It could mention that results are endpoint matches rather than data records, but the output schema likely covers that, so nothing critical is missing.

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 schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds the example keyword style ('work orders', 'lease transactions') and clarifies that query is natural keywords, which is slightly beyond the schema. However, it doesn't add meaning for limit or method beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is correct.

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 states a specific verb ('Find'), a resource ('Buildium API endpoints'), and a clear scope ('by keyword' across paths, summaries, tags, and operation IDs across all 462 operations). It also explicitly positions itself as the starting point when the exact path is unknown, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like buildium_describe_endpoint and buildium_call_endpoint.

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 clear context: 'Start here when you don't already know the exact path.' This implies the alternative is to go directly to a specific endpoint tool when the path is known. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is strong enough for an agent to decide when to use it.

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