search_bitbucket_repos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that the tool is read-only, does not describe pagination behavior, rate limits, or any side effects. The agent cannot infer safety or operational characteristics from this brief description.

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 a single sentence with no redundant words, but it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. It could include more behavioral information without becoming overly verbose.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, an output schema (unseen), and sibling search tools, the description is incomplete. It omits details about case sensitivity, partial matching, result format, and practical usage context that would help an agent decide when to invoke it.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds partial meaning for 'query' by noting it searches across slug, name, and description, but provides no details about 'workspace' (e.g., slug vs. UUID) or 'max_results' (e.g., default and limitation). This leaves significant ambiguity for two of three parameters.

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'), the resource ('Bitbucket Cloud repositories'), and the searchable fields ('by slug, name, or description'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_bitbucket_repos' (list all) and 'get_bitbucket_repo' (fetch specific repo).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention that it should be used for text-based searches, nor does it exclude cases where 'list_bitbucket_repos' or 'get_bitbucket_repo' would be more appropriate.

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