Search Zendesk Tickets

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds that it returns total count, which is a useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations.

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 sentence with examples, conveying essential information without any fluff. Every word is purposeful.

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 no output schema, the description mentions 'returns total count' but does not detail the full response structure. For a search tool, this is adequate but could be more complete by specifying what ticket fields are returned.

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 value for the 'query' parameter by providing examples of valid syntax, which is not in the schema. For 'per_page' and 'page', it does not add extra meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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 it searches tickets using Zendesk query syntax, providing specific examples. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list_tickets' and 'search' by focusing on ticket-specific querying.

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 gives examples of query syntax, which implies when to use the tool (e.g., filtering by status/priority). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives like 'search' or 'list_tickets'.

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