search_services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Find' weakly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not state safety, permissions, result limits, pagination behavior, or whether matching is exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words, and the primary purpose is front-loaded. The second sentence is a compact and useful analogy.

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 search tool whose parameters are fully documented in the schema, the description is mostly complete: it identifies the searchable dimensions and gives an analogous sibling. It omits the return shape and pagination behavior, but the purpose is clear enough for correct 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all eight parameters, so the schema already documents pagination, sorting, and filter semantics. The description names four filter dimensions but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Find services') and lists the main filter dimensions. It distinguishes the tool from search_projects via the services-vs-projects scope, but does not explicitly contrast it with get_service or the list_* service siblings.

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 analogy to search_projects gives implied usage context: this is the service-scoped search counterpart. However, it does not state when to use this instead of get_service, whether it is preferable for broad discovery, or any exclusions or prerequisites.

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