global_search

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It only states the function without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, return format, pagination, rate limits, or whether it searches all resource types. Essential context is missing.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words. However, it is a single sentence without structure. For a simple tool, this is efficient, but could benefit from slight elaboration.

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 is insufficient. It fails to explain what 'global search' returns, which resource types are searched, or how results are structured. Sibling tools like list_secrets provide specific filtering, but this tool's behavior and output are unclear.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., 'Search query', 'slug of workspace'). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'performs a global search' and the resource 'within a workspace'. It distinguishes from sibling tools, which are CRUD operations on specific resources (e.g., list_secrets, list_variables), by indicating broad cross-resource search.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use global_search versus using specific list tools (e.g., list_secrets) or other search capabilities. There is no mention of limitations, prerequisites, or context where this tool is preferred.

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