search_haproxy_frontends

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

The description mentions 'filtering and pagination', which adds behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations. However, it doesn't disclose return format, default sorting, or the client-side nature of filtering, leaving some behavioral aspects undocumented.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action and key features without redundancy.

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 a complete output schema and fully documented parameters, the description is sufficient. It could be enhanced by naming searchable fields, but the schema already covers that. The combination of annotations, schema, and description provides adequate context.

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% with all four parameters fully described. The description's mention of 'filtering and pagination' vaguely maps to search_term and page/page_size, but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'HAProxy frontends', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling search tools by naming the frontend resource specifically, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with search_haproxy_backends or frontend_addresses.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like search_haproxy_backends or search_haproxy_frontend_addresses are not mentioned, and there is no context about when this search is appropriate or how it differs from other search tools.

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