search_offices

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

The description includes the 'readonly-owner' tier, indicating a safe read-only operation, and notes it returns IDs. Since no annotations are provided, it partially covers behavioral disclosure but lacks details on filtering mechanics 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 sentence complemented by endpoint and tier tags, with no redundant phrasing. It is concise and information-dense.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves significant gaps: parameter semantics, return structure beyond 'IDs', and usage context. It is not complete for a search tool with two optional inputs.

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 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain how 'officeID' or 'companyID' are used, whether they can be combined, or what 'matching' means. The parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 company offices/branches and returns matching IDs, using the specific verb 'Search'. It also maps to a specific endpoint. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_offices'.

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 search tool versus alternatives like 'get_offices' or other search tools. It simply states the action without context or exclusions.

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