Search Builds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that results are 'compact build summaries,' which is useful, but doesn't disclose other behaviors like pagination details or result ordering. No contradiction with annotations.

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 optimally structured: a one-line summary followed by a clean argument list. Every line is informative, no fluff. The front-loaded summary immediately conveys the tool's purpose.

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 15-parameter search tool with an output schema, this is quite complete. It covers all filters, return type, and even default behavior for tenant. It lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs siblings, which would make it fully complete, but the core information is present.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does: it explains each filter's purpose, gives examples for result (SUCCESS, FAILURE, etc.), specifies ISO 8601 format for time bounds, and provides a 1-100 range for limit. Some entries like 'Project filter' are thin, but overall it adds significant value over the schema's bare names.

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 'Search builds with filters' and 'Returns compact build summaries,' giving a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from get_build by implying search/list behavior, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 makes it obvious that this tool is for searching/filtering builds, but it doesn't provide explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, nor mention any exclusions. Usage context is implied by the filter parameters rather than stated.

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