autotask_search_expense_reports

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

No annotations are provided, but the description implies a read-only operation (search). It does not disclose behavior like pagination, rate limits, or data scope beyond filters. Since annotations are missing, the description partially fulfills transparency by labeling it as 'search', but lacks detail.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It conveys the core purpose but no additional context, making it minimal.

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 tool has no output schema and 3 parameters, the description should explain return behavior (e.g., list of expense reports, empty array if none) and pagination. It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about the response format.

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 has 100% coverage with good descriptions (e.g., enum values for status, limits for pageSize). The description adds little beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies. However, the description implicitly supports optional filtering, which aligns with the schema, so a 4 is reasonable given full schema coverage.

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 expense reports and mentions it has optional filters, which distinguishes it from creation tools and other search tools. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'autotask_get_expense_report' or other search tools, so a 5 is not warranted.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'autotask_get_expense_report' (which likely retrieves a single report) or when to avoid it. The description only says 'optional filters' without specifying when filters are appropriate.

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