Search deliveries by specified criteria to locate relevant records. Use query, page, and limit parameters to filter and retrieve targeted delivery information.
Search deliveries by criteria
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number | |
| limit | No | Results per page | |
| query | No | Search query |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden, but it only says 'Search deliveries by criteria.' It does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, query semantics, or whether the operation is read-only beyond what the verb 'search' implies.
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 short and front-loaded, with no verbose filler. However, it is so generic that it largely restates the tool name, and 'by criteria' does not add meaningful selection guidance.
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 no output schema and only three optional parameters, an agent still needs to know what 'criteria' can contain and what the result will look like. The description is too sparse to be complete for reliable invocation.
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%: page, limit, and query each have a description. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 identifies the resource ('deliveries') and the operation ('search'), so an agent knows broadly what the tool does. However, 'by criteria' is vague and adds no specifics about what distinguishes this search from boond_deliveries_get or from the many sibling *_search tools.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as boond_deliveries_get or other search tools. The description provides no context, exclusions, or conditions that would help an agent decide.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.