search_deals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only hints at searched fields (title, contact, company) but does not disclose other behaviors like case sensitivity, search syntax, empty results handling, or output format. The description is too minimal to inform the agent beyond basic purpose.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the essential information and is appropriately sized for a simple search tool. Every word earns its place.

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 the low complexity (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is adequate but lacks behavioral details like pagination, sorting, or search algorithm. It does not explain the return format, which is important for an agent to interpret results. However, the tool is simple and siblings provide context.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters, providing baseline of 3. The description adds value by specifying that the term searches across 'título, conato, empresa' (title, contact, company), which is not in the schema. This helps the agent understand the search scope. The limit parameter is not mentioned, but the schema already describes it.

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 verb 'Busca' (search), the resource 'negócios' (deals), and the scope 'por termo (título, conato, empresa)' (by term: title, contact, company). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_deals (which lists all deals) and search_organizations/search_persons (which search other entities).

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 when searching deals by keyword but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. No guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for listing all deals) or any prerequisites. The agent must infer from the tool name and siblings.

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