search_templates

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

The description discloses that output is automatically stored, returns an object ID, and can be referenced in other functions. It also mentions similarity scores and error messages. This adds value beyond the lack of annotations, though it doesn't cover rate limits or side effects.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then parameter list, then return and usage hints. Each section adds value, though the docstring format is slightly verbose for the parameter count. No redundant sentences.

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 no output schema, the description fully explains input parameters, return type (search results with scores, object ID, error messages), and how to use the object ID. It covers all needed context for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining query, top_k (default 10), and pipeline_type (default 'query', options 'indexing' or 'query'). It adds meaning beyond the schema's type and default fields.

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 it searches for pipeline or indexing templates using semantic similarity on name or description. The verb 'searches' and resource 'templates' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like search_pipeline or list_templates.

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 for semantic similarity searches but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over exact-match tools or list_templates. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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