tie_search_ad_objects

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. For a search tool, stating it is read-only would be helpful but 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 concise with a one-line purpose followed by a parameter list. It is well-structured and front-loaded, though it could be slightly more compact by omitting redundant wording in the parameter lines.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not explain the return format, pagination behavior, or result fields. Given that the tool has pagination parameters (page, per_page), this omission reduces 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the tool description provides parameter descriptions in the 'Args' block (e.g., 'Search string to match against AD object names/attributes'). This adds meaning beyond the schema, though it could be more specific about what attributes are searched.

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 starts with a clear verb-resource statement: 'Search Active Directory objects (users, computers, groups, OUs) by name or attribute.' It explicitly lists the object types, which distinguishes it from other tie_ tools that deal with events, alerts, etc.

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives. However, the sibling tools are all different (alerts, attacks, etc.), so the purpose implies usage context. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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