apollo_search_sequences

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the burden. The only behavioral trait disclosed is the requirement for a master API key. The description does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned, or any potential side effects.

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 covering purpose and a key requirement. No extraneous words, efficiently front-loaded.

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?

With three parameters (only one described), no annotations, and an output schema that is not referenced, the description is insufficient for agent understanding. It lacks details on pagination, filtering behavior, and output structure, even though output schema exists.

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?

Schema description coverage is low (33%, only q_name has a description). The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it only implies that q_name is for keyword filtering. Page and per_page are not addressed, and the description does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 searches emailer sequences (campaigns) in a user's Apollo account, using the specific verb 'Search' and the resource 'sequences'. This purpose is distinct from sibling tools that search other entities like contacts or companies.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as sequence manipulation tools (apollo_abort_sequence, apollo_archive_sequence) or other search tools. No exclusions or context are given.

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