search_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention pagination behavior (despite start/limit parameters), result format, whether searches are case-sensitive, or performance characteristics. The phrase 'search across' implies a read operation but lacks specifics.

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?

Extremely concise at one sentence. While no words are wasted and the core purpose is front-loaded, the brevity approaches under-specification given the 8 parameters and lack of supporting annotations.

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?

Insufficient for complexity. With 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain pagination, field selection behavior, and result structure. As-is, it leaves critical operational context undocumented.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description implies the 'item_types' parameter by mentioning 'multiple item types' but does not add syntax details, format constraints, or examples beyond what the schema already documents for the 8 parameters.

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 verb (search) and scope (across multiple item types in Pipedrive). The phrase 'multiple item types' effectively distinguishes this from siblings like search_deals, search_persons, and search_organizations which handle single types.

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?

No explicit guidance provided on when to use this tool versus the specific single-type search siblings (search_deals, search_persons, etc.) or when cross-type searching is preferred. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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