Search the controller API

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds useful scoping context (searching the controller's own spec). However, it does not describe the result format, pagination, or how the returned endpoints should be consumed by omada_call.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the follow-up usage guidance with examples 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?

For a read-only search tool, the description covers what it searches and when to use it, while the schema handles parameter details. It does not describe the shape of the search result or how to map results into an omada_call, which would be useful given there is no output schema.

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 75%, and the schema already documents query matching, group restriction, and limit behavior; the method enum is self-explanatory. The tool description adds example query terms but no additional parameter semantics 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Search this controller's own OpenAPI spec for endpoints.' It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling omada_call by positioning itself as the lookup step before an exact operation is known.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use it before omada_call whenever the exact operation is not already known,' with concrete example queries. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use statement or direct comparison to omada_describe_api, but the intended context is clear.

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