search_by_terms

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the search behavior and provides an example, but lacks details on whether the operation is read-only, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if no matches found. The example helps, but more behavioral context would be beneficial.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the purpose and immediately providing a concrete example. 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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and an output schema exists, so the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the core functionality, though it could be more complete by mentioning limitations or sibling differentiation.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds an example of the 'terms' parameter, but the schema already describes it as a list of integers. No additional semantics for 'max_results' are provided beyond the schema's default and description.

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 'Search OEIS sequences by providing integer terms' with a concrete example, making the verb and resource explicit. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_sequence_by_id' and 'search_by_name' by specifying the method (search by integer terms).

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 usage when you have a list of integer terms, and the example clarifies the context. However, it does not explicitly compare to siblings or state when not to use this tool, leaving room for ambiguity.

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