search_sites

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden: it does not state that this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, whether results are paginated or ranked, or any scope limits. Only the terse purpose is conveyed.

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?

A single efficient phrase with no filler. It is appropriately short for a one-parameter tool, though it is too sparse to be front-loaded with any routing or behavioral context.

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 one-parameter search with no output schema, the description covers the essentials, but it omits any differentiation from list_my_sites and get_site_by_url, leaving the agent to guess which site-retrieval tool fits a given request.

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 100% and the single query parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description's "by keyword" adds nothing beyond the schema's "Search term for sites," so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Search for SharePoint sites by keyword" states a clear verb (search) and resource (SharePoint sites) plus the matching mechanism. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling list_my_sites, which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the alternative list_my_sites despite it being a plausible competitor. The agent must infer that this is for keyword-driven discovery rather than enumerating known sites.

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