Search the knowledge base

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds significant behavioral context: it explains that Freshdesk has no v2 search endpoint, so the tool walks the category/folder tree, costs several rate-limit calls, and caches nothing. This goes beyond the annotations and is valuable for the agent.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. The second paragraph adds important technical context without fluff. Every sentence carries meaning, so it earns a 5.

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 tool with no output schema, the description does not explicitly state what the tool returns (e.g., a list of matching articles). It also doesn't explain the effect of limit or include_drafts. While the purpose and cost are clear, the lack of return-value detail leaves gaps for an agent invoking the tool.

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 only 33% (only 'term' has a description). The tool description does not compensate by explaining the 'limit' or 'include_drafts' parameters. It mentions 'published' articles but does not address how include_drafts overrides that, leaving parameter semantics unclear.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Search published solution articles by keyword'. It also provides the context of pointing a reply at a documented answer, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like freshdesk_search_tickets or freshdesk_get_article.

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 a clear use case ('so a reply can point at the documented answer') and practical guidance ('worth calling with a narrow term'). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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