ha_search_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'searches' and does not disclose matching behavior, case sensitivity, partial-match semantics, limit behavior, domain filtering semantics, or whether this is a safe read-only operation.

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 a single short sentence with no filler, making it easy to parse quickly. It is concise but arguably too terse to be fully self-sufficient; however, the missing detail is penalized more appropriately 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 tool with 3 parameters and no annotation context, this description is incomplete. It explains what can be searched but omits how limit and domain affect results, what matching rules apply, and what the output contains. The presence of an output schema reduces some burden, but the description still lacks essential operational 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 0%, so the description must compensate for the schema's lack of parameter information. It does explain that the query can target entity_id or friendly_name, but it says nothing about the meaning of the 'limit' or 'domain' 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 a specific action ('Busca' = search) and resource ('entidades'), and specifies the two key search fields: entity_id and friendly_name. This is clear enough to understand what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like ha_get_entity.

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 alternatives. It implies searching for entities by ID or friendly name, but doesn't mention when to prefer ha_get_entity for exact retrieval or ha_unavailable_entities for listing unavailable entities.

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