search_models

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the disclosure burden. It clearly indicates a read-style search and notes that output is a JSON string, but it doesn't mention matching behavior (exact vs partial), pagination, or any access constraints.

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 compact and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by a clear Args section and Returns line. Every line earns its place, though the parameter explanations could be slightly tighter without losing 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 3-parameter search tool, the description covers all inputs, defaults, limits, and the return type, and an output schema exists to fill in response details. It lacks only search-behavior nuances and usage differentiation, which are captured by the usage and behavioral dimensions.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining all three parameters: query, optional manufacturer filter, and limit with default and maximum (100). It adds the max limit constraint that the schema does not expose, making the arguments actionable.

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 starts with 'Search for models by name,' a specific verb and resource, so an agent knows exactly what operation this is. It doesn't explicitly distinguish this from sibling resource searches like search_manufacturers or list_models, but the unique 'models' resource makes confusion unlikely.

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 on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as list_models, list_manufacturers, or search_manufacturers. The description only lists arguments and gives no context about use cases or exclusions.

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