Search Clients

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds 'fuzzy match' behavior but does not explain what fuzzy means or the return format (e.g., list of matches). With annotations covering safety, the description adds minimal extra transparency.

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 extremely concise: a single phrase with no unnecessary words. Every word adds value.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and matching method. However, it could be slightly more complete by mentioning that the tool returns a list of matching clients.

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 100% and the description adds 'fuzzy match' context to the 'name' parameter, but does not elaborate on expected format or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema already documents the parameter.

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 searches clients by name with fuzzy matching, distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_client' (exact ID), 'find_client_by_code' (by code), and 'list_clients' (all clients).

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 name-based fuzzy search but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'find_client_by_code' or 'get_client'. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance.

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