search_dhcp_custom_options

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that filtering and pagination are supported, which is useful but not elaborated on (e.g., no mention of result format or default behavior). No contradiction with 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, front-loads the verb 'Search', and contains no filler. It is appropriately sized and immediately conveys the tool's purpose.

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 read-only search tool with comprehensive schema descriptions and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It captures the essential behavior (searching with filtering and pagination) without needing to over-explain, though it could briefly mention the response is a list.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with all four parameters clearly documented. The description's mention of 'filtering and pagination' only summarizes what the schema already defines, adding no new semantic detail beyond the structured fields.

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 function: 'Search DHCP server custom options' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling search tools by naming the specific resource type ('custom options'), and 'with filtering and pagination' adds scope.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and description—it is for searching DHCP custom options. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over other search tools or any exclusions/alternatives, so it does not fully meet the 'explicit' bar.

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