zendesk_search_by_brand

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses automatic brand name resolution but does not mention read-only nature, pagination, or other behavioral traits. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose and key unique feature.

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?

Despite 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain return format, pagination, or limits. Incomplete for a search tool with multiple filters.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context only for brand_name (auto-resolve). Other parameters are already well-described in schema. No significant added meaning beyond what schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states 'Search tickets by brand name' with a specific verb and resource, and adds the distinguishing feature of automatic brand name-to-ID resolution. It differentiates well from sibling tools like zendesk_search and zendesk_search_by_field.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description implies usage when you have a brand name, but does not compare with alternatives such as zendesk_search or zendesk_search_by_field. Basic implicit guidance only.

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