search_by_property

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 only states the purpose without any details on side effects, return format, performance, permissions, or read-only guarantees. This is a significant gap for a search tool that could have varied behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It gets straight to the point, making it appropriately concise for a simple tool. It could be more informative, but the structure itself is efficient.

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?

Despite having only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is too bare to be complete. It does not indicate what the search returns (e.g., IDs, objects, names), whether it is exact or fuzzy matching, or how it relates to sibling search tools. In the absence of annotations, this leaves significant ambiguity for an agent.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (propertyName and propertyValue), achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond 'specific property values', so it does not enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema baseline.

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 'Find objects with specific property values' clearly states the action (find), the resource (objects), and the criterion (specific property values). It distinguishes from siblings like search_files (which searches files) and search_objects (potentially broader search), though it could be more specific about what 'objects' refers to in this context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or preferred scenarios. Siblings like search_objects might overlap, but the description does not clarify when one should be chosen over the other.

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