search_glossary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries some burden. It indicates this is a non-destructive search/read operation implicitly (durchsuchen), but doesn't disclose anything about pagination, return format behavior, or whether results are real-time or cached. For a search function, the read-only nature is reasonably inferable, and the output schema exists to document return values.

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?

One concise sentence that communicates the core purpose efficiently. It's appropriately sized for a simple search tool with just 2 parameters. Every word earns its place, though it could benefit from a second sentence about result format or usage context.

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 simple search tool with 2 straightforward parameters and an output schema present, this description is reasonably complete. The function does one clear thing. Given low complexity and the presence of an output schema, the single sentence suffices, though slightly more context about the translation behavior could help.

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 0%, but there are only 2 simple parameters (query string and limit integer). The description names what the query represents (technical terms to be translated) which adds slight meaning, but 'limit' is self-explanatory. The description adds marginal value over the schema for these simple parameters.

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 states the purpose: search the business glossary, translating technical terms for business users. It names a specific verb (durchsuchen) and resource (Business Glossary) plus the value-add (translates technical terms for business users). However, it doesn't clearly distinguish this from sibling search tools like search_data_products, and the purpose is somewhat implicit in the language.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or when business users should be directed here specifically. The description implies its use case (translating technical terms for business users) but provides no explicit when/when-not guidance.

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