search_factors

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It honestly describes the returned fields and clarifies that full audit details are intentionally deferred to lookup tools. It does not describe match semantics or empty-result/pagination behavior, so it is not quite a 5.

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?

Three dense sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, the return contract is summarized, and the routing guidance is placed at the end.

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 is complete for this tool category: it covers what is searched, what is returned, what is omitted, and which sibling tools cover the omitted case. Since there is no output schema, explicitly naming the returned fields is valuable and sufficient.

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 all four parameters are already documented. The description echoes the search modes by mentioning section, key prefix, and free text, but it does not add any meaning 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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Find emission factors by section, key prefix, or free text.' It also lists the exact fields returned, which immediately differentiates it from lookup_factor and lookup_factors.

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?

It explicitly says when to switch to alternatives: 'for one factor's full audit envelope ... call lookup_factor; for several, call lookup_factors.' This gives the agent a concrete routing decision rather than leaving it to infer.

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