search_program

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

With no annotations, the description adds a key behavioral trait: case-insensitive substring matching. However, it does not disclose other important aspects such as rate limits, authentication needs, pagination, or what happens with no results. It provides some but not comprehensive behavioral context.

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 three sentences long, each serving a purpose: stating the function, adding behavioral detail, and giving usage examples. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no fluff.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description adequately covers input parameters and defaults. However, it fails to describe the return format (e.g., programme titles, times, channels) or any pagination. For a search tool, this gap limits 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%, but the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it clarifies that the title search is case-insensitive and matches substrings, states defaults for channels and date, and explains the 'Optional list of channel names or ids'.

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's function: 'Search for Danish TV programmes by title across one or more channels for a given date.' It includes specific examples like 'Klovn', 'Nyhederne', and distinguishes from siblings like list_channels or tonight by focusing on substring 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?

The description implies usage for finding specific shows by title, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'tonight' or 'whats_on' or state when not to use it. No alternative tools are mentioned.

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