search_equipment

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It states the tool searches and filters, but does not disclose pagination, return format, or whether it's read-only. The input schema hints at pagination via limit/offset parameters, but the description lacks explicit behavioral details.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and filter options. It is front-loaded and to the point, though it could be slightly more structured to separate the action from filters.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the search action and some filters but omits details about output behavior, pagination, and typical use cases. It is adequate but not complete.

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%, so all parameters have descriptions. The description lists filter categories but adds no new semantic value beyond what is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 searches D&D 5e SRD equipment, weapons, armor, and magic items, and lists specific filters. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_monsters and search_spells, which have different domains.

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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool (for equipment-related searches) and the filtering options guide usage. It does not explicitly exclude other contexts, but the sibling tools cover other domains, making the intended use clear.

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