get_installations_by_product

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'filter', which implies a read-only operation, but does not mention pagination behavior, result size, authentication, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool that could return large datasets.

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, focused sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose without any redundant words. It is appropriately sized for a simple filter operation and front-loads the core action.

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 tool has 3 parameters and no output schema, so the description must provide enough context to fill the gaps. While the basic purpose is clear, it lacks usage guidance, return value details, and behavioral caveats. For a simple filter, this is a minimum viable description with clear gaps relative to sibling tools.

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 describes all three parameters (product_txt, limit, offset) with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional semantic meaning. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the specific verb 'filter' and identifies the resource 'installations', with the clear scope 'by product name'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_installations_by_customer and get_installations_by_system_type. It is neither a tautology nor vague.

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 that this tool should be used when filtering installations by product name, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. Since sibling tools exist for filtering by other criteria, the lack of explicit exclusions limits the agent's ability to compare options.

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