search_hosts

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no further behavioral context such as result limits, pagination, or how broad matching behaves, leaving only the basic purpose statement beyond annotations.

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 wording. It states the operation and search keys efficiently, though the sparseness is addressed in other dimensions.

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 simple three-parameter search tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It still omits practical context such as result limiting, group scoping, and when this search should be preferred over host-detail tools.

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 67%, with query and group documented but limit only constrained by default/min/max. The description usefully expands query semantics to include technical name, but does not explain group filtering or the result limit.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: "Find hosts" with lookup keys name, technical name, IP, and DNS. It is clear enough to separate from detail tools, but it does not name or distinguish itself from siblings such as get_host_details or zabbix_hosts.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives. An agent can infer this is for searching hosts, but must guess when to choose it over get_host_details or zabbix_hosts.

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