bw_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses search behavior, wildcard support, filtering, and priority over siblings. However, there is a slight inconsistency: the first sentence says 'by name or description', but the parameter description only mentions name. Also lacks details on pagination or limits.

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?

A single paragraph of 5 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and usage, no unnecessary words. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

Covers main use case and differentiation from many siblings. Lacks details on return format (no output schema), pagination, and consistency on searching description. Acceptable for a search tool given good annotations are absent.

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 coverage is 100%. Description adds value beyond schema by providing wildcard examples, common object_type values, and usage guidance. However, the schema already describes parameters well, so the addition is moderate.

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 is a universal search for BW objects by name or description, lists many object types, and explicitly distinguishes from type-specific siblings by instructing to prefer this tool when the object name is unknown or a pattern is given.

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?

Explicit guidelines: 'Use this whenever the user wants to find, list, or look up any BW object', and 'prefer this tool over type-specific get/list tools whenever the object name is unknown or a pattern is given.' Also explains wildcard usage and object_type filtering.

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