search_slos

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It mentions pagination and faceted search but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or its side effects. Missing details on auth requirements, rate limits, or error handling.

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 with two sentences. The first sentence defines the core purpose, and the second adds key features. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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 lacks critical details about return format, pagination specifics, query syntax, and output structure. Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description does not sufficiently equip an agent to use the tool effectively for complex queries.

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 adds meaning by linking parameters to features: 'query string' for query parameter, 'pagination' for page_size/page_number, 'faceted search' for include_facets. However, it lacks details on parameter formats, constraints, or defaults.

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 tool searches and filters SLOs by query string, with specific features like pagination and faceted search. It specifies the resource (SLOs) and the action (search/filter), distinguishing it from general list tools like 'get-slos'.

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 implies usage for finding specific SLOs by query, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like 'get-slos' or when not to use it. No guidance on prerequisites or alternatives is provided.

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