gateway_admin_audit_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description correctly avoids restating that. It adds valuable context by noting the results are 'redacted' and that telemetry:read is required, which an agent needs to know before invocation. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then adds the permission requirement. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 tool has 10 optional filter parameters, no parameter descriptions, and no usage hints, the description is not complete enough for an agent to query effectively. The output schema and readOnly annotation help, but they do not compensate for the complete absence of parameter semantics and alternative-tool routing.

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 10 undocumented parameters, but it does not mention any of them. While parameter names like days and limit are somewhat self-explanatory, fields such as event, status, system, decision, and tool_name have no allowed-value or formatting guidance.

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 states a specific verb ('Search') and a clear resource ('redacted GatewayMCP audit metadata'). It also distinguishes this tool from the sibling gateway_admin_audit_summary by emphasizing search over summary, and the 'redacted' qualifier adds precision.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like gateway_admin_audit_summary or gateway_call_tool_sanitized. The only context provided is the telemetry:read permission requirement, which is a prerequisite, not a usage decision guide.

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