search_trip_reports

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool searches over 8000+ trip reports and suggests query usage. However, it does not state that the tool is read-only, nor does it describe pagination or result format beyond what the schema provides.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by context and usage tip. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or 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?

Given no output schema and 100% parameter coverage, the description explains the domain (mountaineers.org, 8000+ reports) and provides a usage tip. It could mention pagination or that results are a list, but it is largely complete for a search tool.

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?

Schemas cover 100% of parameters. The description adds specific context for the query parameter (route name narrowing), but the baseline is 3 given high schema coverage. The page parameter detail (20 results per page) is already in the schema, so minimal added value.

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 trip reports on mountaineers.org, defines what trip reports are, and mentions the archive size. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_trip_report (single report) and get_route_trip_reports (route-specific reports) by being the general search tool.

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 a clear usage tip: 'To narrow to a specific route, pass the route name as the query.' This helps the agent decide when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like get_route_trip_reports.

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