search_champions

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

With no annotations provided, the description does not explicitly state behavioral traits such as idempotency, rate limits, or side effects. However, 'Search' implies a non-destructive read operation, and the description is adequate for an agent to infer safety. It could be improved by clarifying the absence of mutations or result ordering.

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 concise with two sentences, no redundancy, and front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence adds necessary information without wasted words.

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 search tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the purpose, usage guidance, and parameter semantics adequately. It lacks details on return format or result ordering, but the schema handles parameter descriptions, making the tool usable without further 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?

The input schema has 100% parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by summarizing the main filter dimensions (name, cost, trait, role) and clarifying that the output is a summary list, which is not evident from the schema alone.

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 for TFT champions by name, cost, trait, or role, with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_champion by noting that it returns a summary list, while get_champion provides full details.

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 clear guidance on when to use this tool (searching for champions) and when to use the alternative (get_champion for full details). It does not list specific exclusions or scenarios to avoid, but the context is sufficient for basic usage decisions.

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