search-security-signals

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Search', implying a read operation, but fails to mention any side effects, permissions, or limitations.

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 relatively concise but contains redundancy in listing similar examples. It front-loads the core purpose but could be tightened.

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 tool is moderately complex (nested objects, 3 parameters, no output schema), but the description provides no information about return values, pagination behavior, or common use patterns.

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 only 33% schema description coverage, the description adds no parameter context beyond the schema. It does not explain the purpose of filter, sort, or page objects, leaving significant 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 identifies the tool as searching for security monitoring signals, with explicit synonyms like threat detections and security alerts. It differentiates from sibling tools like search-security-findings by focusing on signals.

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 provides example use cases ('recent security alerts', 'threat detections', 'security signal search'), which imply usage context but lack explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool guidance.

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