ofac_search

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

The description adds the behavioral detail of case-insensitive substring matching, which goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint). It also clarifies the search scope ('SDN sanctions list') and by 'name or entity', providing useful context. However, it does not mention result format or pagination, but annotations cover the read-only nature.

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 one sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Search', and contains no filler. It conveys the essential scope and behavior 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?

For a simple two-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context about what it searches and how matching works. It could mention what the response contains, but given the simplicity and schema coverage, it is largely complete. The lack of differentiation from sibling search tools is a minor gap.

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 schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The tool description adds a bit of semantic value by clarifying that 'name' accepts both names and entities and that matching is case-insensitive, but this is a modest supplement to the schema descriptions.

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 tool searches the OFAC SDN sanctions list by name or entity, specifying the match behavior as case-insensitive substring. This is a specific verb-resource pair, but it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ofac_sdn_list or ofac_filter, though the SDN list specification helps.

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 implies the tool is for name/entity searches against the SDN list, but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives like ofac_consolidated_list or ofac_filter. There are no exclusions or alternative tool mentions, leaving some ambiguity.

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