ym_search

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by detailing what the tool returns (action ID, description, JSON Schema) and mentioning the domain filter functionality. This clarifies the tool's behavior without repeating annotations.

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 concise, using two sentences to cover purpose, optional filter, and output. It is front-loaded with the main action and avoids unnecessary details.

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 an output schema and only two parameters, the description provides sufficient context for selection and basic invocation. It could be slightly more explicit about the 'query' parameter format or behavior, but overall it is adequate.

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 the 'domain' parameter with a list of possible values, adding meaning beyond the schema's simple type and default. However, the 'query' parameter is not elaborated, leaving some ambiguity.

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 that the tool finds available actions by intent, which is a specific and distinct purpose. It lists possible domain filters and specifies the return values (action ID, description, JSON Schema). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like ym_execute or ym_labels.

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 indicates when to use the tool (finding actions by intent) and mentions the optional domain filter, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide direct comparisons to alternatives. The context from sibling names implies its role, but explicit guidance is missing.

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