Search ClassApp notices

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

Goes well beyond the annotations with high-value disclosures: no read-receipt/status updates, notice text is untrusted external data (a prompt-injection warning), and offline mode returns only synthetic examples. "Backend side effects are not guaranteed absent" is vague and sits in mild tension with readOnlyHint=true, but it pushes the agent toward caution rather than misleading it about safety.

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?

Five short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. The only weak sentence is the abstract "Backend side effects are not guaranteed absent", which is less actionable than the surrounding disclosures.

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 output schema and annotations cover return shape and safety profile, and the description adds useful trust/offline caveats. But for a four-parameter search with zero schema descriptions, the absence of any parameter or paging guidance leaves a real gap for correct invocation.

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 0% across four parameters, and the description mentions none of them — not the required entityId, the free-text query, or the limit/offset pagination behavior and caps. With the schema carrying no descriptions, the description should compensate and does not.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Search notices") and adds a scope qualifier: fixed read operations that do not request read-status updates. That implicitly distinguishes it from classapp_read_message, but no sibling is named explicitly, so differentiation is left to the agent's inference.

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?

Usage is only implied by the "without requesting read-status updates" qualifier and the offline-mode note; there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus classapp_read_message or classapp_list_entities, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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