search_runs

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

Without annotations, the description discloses pagination behavior (nextLink, skipToken) and a conditional requirement (workflowName for Standard SKU). It could mention read-only status, but overall it adds useful 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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, and additional details are efficiently provided.

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 tool with 10 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: purpose, sibling differentiation, pagination, and a requirement. It doesn't describe return values, but the schema handles parameter details well.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the friendly parameters (vs. OData syntax) and clarifying skipToken pagination, exceeding the baseline.

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 searches run history with friendly parameters, explicitly distinguishing it from list_run_history by mentioning when to use this tool instead.

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 provides specific guidance: workflowName is required for Standard SKU, and recommends using this tool over list_run_history when filtering by criteria. It could explicitly state when not to use, but the implication is clear.

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