opensearch_terms

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

Since no annotations are present, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the heap warning and fielddata loading concerns for analyzed fields, but doesn't describe the return format or pagination behavior. Output schema covers return format, making this adequate.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, every sentence adds essential information with no redundancy or filler.

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 output schema exists and parameters are fully described, the description provides all necessary context: purpose, usage rules, and behavioral caveats, making it complete for effective tool 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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds value by giving concrete field examples ('agent.name', 'rule.id') and usage advice, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 it's a 'frequency table for a keyword field' returning 'top N values with their document counts,' which precisely defines the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from siblings like opensearch_multi_terms and opensearch_search.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use advice (keyword fields), a concrete fix for common issues ('append .keyword'), and a clear prohibition ('never use on analyzed text fields') with a reason, offering complete guidance for correct invocation.

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