ddb_search_feats

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe, read-only operation. The description adds an important behavioral detail beyond annotations: the need for a prior login. It does not contradict any annotations and provides actionable operational 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 two short sentences that pack essential information: the tool's purpose and a crucial usage prerequisite. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 comprehensive schema descriptions and read-only/open-world annotations, the description covers the primary purpose and the only significant prerequisite (login). It does not detail return format, but the lack of an output schema and the simplicity of a search tool make this acceptable. It is slightly less complete than the top-tier example because it omits any indication of pagination or result list behavior, but the schema already covers pagination via limit/offset.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter meanings are fully documented. The description's mention of 'name or prerequisite text' maps to two of the four parameters, but adds no additional semantic information beyond the schema. This meets the baseline for 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's function: 'Search feats by name or prerequisite text.' This uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('feats'), and highlights the two key search dimensions. It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling search tools for spells, monsters, equipment, etc.

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 a clear usage prerequisite: 'Requires login — run ddb_login first if you haven't already.' This tells the agent when it can be used (after login) and implicitly when not to use it (before login). However, it does not explicitly compare against alternative search tools, though the tool name and context make the intended use case clear enough.

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