search_ipsec_phase1_encryptions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which align with the search operation. The description adds only the behavioral detail of 'filtering and pagination', but does not disclose any additional side effects, rate limits, or operational nuances. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not enriching.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose and eliminates unnecessary words. Every element serves the goal of clarity 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 straightforward read-only search tool with complete parameter documentation and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers what the tool does, and the schema covers how to invoke it. A minor deduction for not mentioning any potential limitations or performance considerations, but overall complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 provides detailed descriptions for all four parameters (page, sort_by, page_size, parent_id) with 100% coverage. The description's mention of 'filtering and pagination' merely reflects the schema, adding no extra parameter-level meaning beyond what's already documented.

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: searching IPsec Phase 1 encryption algorithm entries. It uses a specific verb ('Search') with the exact resource, distinguishing it from create/update/delete operations and from Phase 2 search variants. The mention of filtering and pagination adds helpful 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?

The description provides basic context that the tool performs searching with filtering and pagination, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like search_ipsec_phase1s or search_ipsec_phase2_encryptions. Usage guidance is implied through the name rather than explicitly stated.

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