eiu_search

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral context. It adds useful facts about cached reference data and the limit cap (max 100) beyond the schema, but it does not state read-only behavior, output characteristics, or error handling. Acceptable for a simple read-oriented search, but it is not rich.

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 concise and front-loaded: a one-sentence purpose, a clear usage pointer, and a compact Args block. No redundant wording or filler; every sentence contributes.

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?

The tool is simple, has an output schema to cover return values, and the description provides param details plus sequencing with eiu_get_data. It is slightly incomplete in not addressing the relationship to eiu_browse, but it contains the essential context 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining both parameters: query with concrete examples and limit with default and max. It adds meaning beyond the schema, though it could be more precise about the interpretation of 'limit' (number of results vs. something else).

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 clear verb and resource: search EIU series by keyword in cached reference data. It also notes the downstream use (finding series codes before calling eiu_get_data), but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling eiu_browse, so purpose is clear but sibling distinction is left implicit.

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 gives explicit guidance: 'Use this to find series codes before calling eiu_get_data.' This establishes when to use the tool relative to eiu_get_data, but it does not mention alternatives such as eiu_browse or exclusions, so it falls short of full when/when-not coverage.

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