searchCrowdfundingCampaigns

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, indicating a safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds 'Access detailed information to track and analyze crowdfunding activities,' which is generic and does not reveal significant behavioral traits beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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 concise, with two sentences. The first sentence immediately states the purpose, and the second adds context. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain return values or structure. However, for a simple search tool with clear annotations, the description is adequate but could mention what information is returned (e.g., campaign details).

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 has one required parameter 'name' with a clear description. The tool description essentially repeats the schema's parameter description without adding new meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it searches for crowdfunding campaigns by company name, campaign name, or platform. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like getCrowdfundingCampaignsByCIK and getLatestCrowdfundingCampaigns by specifying search criteria.

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 usage for general search but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like getCrowdfundingCampaignsByCIK or getLatestCrowdfundingCampaigns. No exclusions or context are given.

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