boond_settings_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only repeats the action (search) without revealing what the tool returns, whether it is read-only, or any side effects. The description adds little beyond the tool name, offering no insight into output format, pagination, or potential limitations.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero extraneous words. It directly states the action and scope. This is ideal conciseness for a tool with no parameters.

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 simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to indicate a search over all settings. However, it does not clarify how this differs from boond_settings_get, nor does it describe the return shape. Given the sibling context, more guidance would improve completeness, but the simplicity keeps it from being severely deficient.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is trivially 100% since no properties are defined. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and the description correctly says 'all system settings' implying no filtering, which is consistent. No additional parameter explanation is needed.

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 'Search all system settings' clearly states a specific verb (Search) and resource (all system settings). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like boond_settings_get and boond_settings_update by implying a broad listing operation rather than a single fetch or modification. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that get is for retrieving a specific setting or that update modifies settings. There is no explicit context for choosing search over other settings tools.

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