search_cloud_diagrams

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) are consistent with the read-only search behavior. Description adds that it returns scheme, components, and prop matches, and supports optional scoping. Does not disclose pagination behavior or result limitations, but annotations already convey 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?

Three sentences with no filler: first states main use, second describes returns and optional scope, third provides negative guidance. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 search tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, this description covers purpose, return types, scoping options, and exclusions. No output schema needed since return is described textually. Sufficient 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 covers all parameters (100% coverage). Description adds context by explaining what from/size do for pagination per category and that ss_id limits to a layer. It also states the search returns three categories, enhancing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'search their cloud infrastructure diagrams and components by name or property', specifying verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings by naming alternatives for cost analysis (run_query) and incidents (get_cloud_incidents).

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?

Explicitly states when to use (search by name/property) and when not to use (cost analysis or incidents), with exact tool names. Also mentions optional scoping parameters (ss_id, from/size) for narrowing search.

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