optfeature_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool searches by name and returns a list of matching entries, which is core behavior. However, it does not characterize matching semantics (partial/fuzzy/case-insensitive), default scoping beyond the schema, or any output shape details.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the operation and resource, the second covers the result and usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With a rich schema covering all parameters and a clear statement that the tool returns a list of matching entries, the description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It could add more detail about the returned entry shape, but this is a moderate gap given the straightforward search nature and the schema's completeness.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which meets the baseline for full schema coverage but does not exceed it.

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 ('Search'), a specific resource ('D&D 5e optional class feature or invocations'), and the search key ('by name'). It also names the omnisearch sibling as the alternative for uncertain content types, which helps distinguish it from the many other search tools.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool ('Use when you know the content type') and when to use an alternative ('if unsure of the type, use omnisearch instead'). This gives an agent a clear decision rule with minimal inference.

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