search-security-findings

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions optional pagination cursor and permission requirements, including a note about OAuth apps. However, it does not clarify pagination behavior, rate limits, or what happens when no results are found, leaving gaps.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds necessary context. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose and permissions but lacks details on pagination behavior, return structure, and full parameter explanations. Without output schema or annotations, it is not fully complete for a tool with nested objects and 3 parameters.

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 description adds meaning by explaining that 'filter.query' is for querying and 'page.cursor' is for pagination, but it omits the 'limit' parameter and does not describe nested object structures. Given 0% schema description coverage, it partially compensates but not fully.

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 the verb ('List or search') and the resource ('Datadog security findings (Cloud Security Management)'), making the tool's purpose specific and easily distinguishable from siblings like 'list-posture-findings' or 'get-security-finding'.

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 mentions required permissions but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to search vs. list, or how it differs from 'search-security-signals'). There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice.

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