Find Kibana saved objects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does convey read-only, space-scoped search behavior. However, it does not disclose the return format, pagination behavior, or the fact that the schema's 'search' parameter only searches titles, which remains in the schema rather than the description.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that names the action, resource, scope, and common types with no redundancy or filler. Every word carries meaning.

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?

For a read-only search tool with fully documented parameters, the description adequately covers scope and typical use. However, because there is no output schema, the description does not compensate by describing return values or result structure, leaving an agent to guess at the response shape.

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 100%, with every parameter having a meaningful description, so the tool description adds little value beyond examples already provided in the schema. The baseline for full schema coverage is 3, and there is no reason to go higher.

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 specifies the verb 'Search' and the resource 'Kibana saved objects in the active space', and it enumerates concrete object types such as dashboards, visualizations, index patterns, saved searches, and lens objects. It identifies a distinct resource category from the sibling ES tools, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the similar kbn_list_data_views sibling.

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 the obvious use case—searching Kibana saved objects—but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives. An agent can infer the purpose, yet there is no routing information to avoid overlap with sibling tools like kbn_list_data_views.

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