search_combined

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and gives no information about output format, error handling, pagination, rate limits, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for an agent to call it confidently.

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 a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words, and the core purpose is front-loaded. It is appropriately brief, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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 combined search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how fields and values correlate (semicolon-separated values matching comma-separated fields), nor does it describe the return format. An agent would need to infer the query structure from the schema alone, which is risky. More context like examples or result handling is needed.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 without adding extra value.

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 it runs a combined search across multiple fields, which distinguishes it from the single-field sibling tools like search_by_author and search_by_title. The verb 'Run' and resource 'combined PoetryDB search' are specific, though it doesn't name an alternative directly.

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 when multiple search fields are needed, which differentiates it from single-field siblings. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over others, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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