search_ipsec_phase1s

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read operation (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds the behavioral detail that filtering and pagination are supported, which is relevant for agents expecting potentially large result sets. No contradiction.

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 extraneous content. Every word contributes to understanding 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?

The description, combined with the complete parameter schema and read-only annotations, provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. The existence of an output schema further reduces the need to describe return values.

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 already provides descriptions for all 6 parameters with 100% coverage, so the description doesn't need to add much. The phrase 'filtering and pagination' broadly maps to the parameters but doesn't add detail beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'Search' and clearly identifies the resource 'IPsec Phase 1 (IKE) entries', with qualifiers 'filtering and pagination'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_ipsec_phase2s.

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 implies the tool is used to find IPsec Phase1 entries, which is clear context given the tool name. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention any exclusions, so it doesn't reach a 5.

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