search_installations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Search' implies a read-only operation, and the limit/offset parameters hint at pagination, but the description does not explicitly state that it's non-destructive, return format, or any rate limits. It is minimally transparent but lacks richer context.

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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the core functionality without unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place.

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 is a simple search with only 3 parameters and no output schema. The description conveys the basic purpose, but given the existence of specialized sibling tools, it would be more complete if it explicitly positioned itself as the flexible alternative. Still, it is minimally sufficient for a low-complexity search.

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?

Even though schema coverage is 100% (each parameter has a description), the tool description adds valuable context by listing example search fields ('system name, customer, product, etc.'), which clarifies what the query string can target beyond the generic 'Search query string'.

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') and the resource ('installations'), and specifies the search scope ('by various fields' with examples). It distinguishes itself from the sibling getter tools by being the general-purpose search option, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 this is the tool for flexible searching across multiple fields, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of the dedicated get_installations_by_* tools. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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