globus_transfer_search_endpoints_and_collections

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions visibility constraint but lacks details on pagination behavior, filter matching semantics (e.g., case sensitivity, partial match), rate limits, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a search tool.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no extraneous words. Every word serves a clear function.

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?

Given the tool complexity (3 parameters, output schema present), the description is adequate but lacks explanations of search behavior, result set expectations, and permission context. Output schema exists but description could still provide more operational 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond the schema: it mentions 'filter string' corresponding to filter_fulltext, but doesn't clarify format or behavior. No additional value provided.

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 action (search), the resource (endpoints and collections), and the scope (visible to user). It differentiates from the sibling tool 'list_endpoints_and_collections' by indicating search with a filter string.

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 when to use (when filtering is needed) but does not explicitly contrast with the list tool or provide when-not-to-use guidance. An agent can infer from the name and sibling list, but no explicit alternatives or exclusions are given.

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