search_tickets

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

No annotations are provided. The description implies a read operation (list) but does not explicitly state read-only behavior or disclose any side effects. Pagination support is noted, but overall behavioral disclosure is minimal for a tool without 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?

The description is only two sentences, with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and resource. Every sentence adds value without 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 4 parameters (including a nested filters object), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is somewhat incomplete. It covers boardId and cursor but omits details on filters, pageSize, and the return value (list of tickets). It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds that boardId is 'required (default: 1)' and 'Supports pagination via cursor,' which slightly clarifies usage but mostly reiterates schema info. No deep parameter semantics added.

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 'List tickets from a NinjaOne board,' which clearly identifies the action (list) and the resource (tickets). It distinguishes from sibling 'get_ticket' by implying multiple results, but does not explicitly contrast with other list-like siblings.

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 mentions required boardId and pagination support, providing some usage context. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_ticket or update_ticket, missing explicit when/when-not guidance.

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