cms_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds value by specifying return fields (dataset IDs, titles, descriptions) and the link to cms_query. No pagination or limit info is given, but this is a simple search tool.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundancy. The first states the action and resource, the second states output and next step. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers inputs, outputs, and the follow-up step (cms_query). Given the read-only annotation and simple scope, no major gaps exist.

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% with a detailed description of the keyword parameter including examples. The description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the action ('Search') and the resource ('CMS provider data datasets'), specifying that it returns dataset IDs, titles, and descriptions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cms_query (data fetching) and cms_hospitals/cms_nursing_homes (specific datasets).

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 explicitly instructs to use the returned ID with cms_query to fetch data, establishing a clear workflow. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose and cross-reference make the usage context clear.

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