autotask_search_configuration_items

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

The description and input schema together indicate a search/read operation. No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not mention destructive behavior or side effects, but search operations are safely assumed read-only. The description is sufficient for a search tool.

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?

Extremely concise at 9 words. Every word carries meaning, no redundancy. Perfect for a simple search operation.

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 schema is complete (5 params, all described) and no output schema, the description is sufficient for a basic search. However, it lacks details on pagination behavior, sorting, or expected return format, which could be added without bloating.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 configuration items in Autotask with optional filters, making the purpose straightforward. However, it does not differentiate this from sibling tools like autotask_search_products or autotask_search_services, which are similar search tools. So it loses one point.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It mentions 'optional filters' but no context on typical use cases or when not to use it. However, the 'configuration items' scope is implied, and the input schema allows filtering, so it's minimally adequate.

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