Jobs-tools-knowledgeBase-search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the search scope but does not mention matching behavior (exact/substring), case sensitivity, pagination, result format, or any side effects. This is minimal for an agent to anticipate tool behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every term ('Search', 'pages', 'title', 'content') adds distinct meaning.

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 with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but omits return-value expectations and how results are ordered or limited. It is minimally adequate but lacks completeness for an agent to fully predict outcomes.

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 covers both parameters with basic descriptions. The tool description adds value by clarifying that the 'query' parameter searches both title and content, which is not evident from the schema's 'Search query' 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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('pages'), and identifies search fields (title or content). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'searchByTag', which searches by a different dimension.

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 use for text-based page search, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'searchByTag' or 'getPage'. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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