mitre_search_campaigns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states what it does, but omits any behavioral traits such as return format, pagination, authentication requirements, or rate limits. This is insufficient for a search tool.

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 wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it could benefit from slight structuring (e.g., bullet points) for clarity.

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?

The tool lacks an output schema, so the description should explain what the result contains (e.g., list of campaigns with basic info). It does not. Additionally, it does not differentiate from similar sibling search tools beyond the resource name. The description is incomplete for a search tool with no output schema.

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%, with each parameter having a detailed description in the schema. The tool description adds little beyond restating the two modes. It does not provide additional context like typical values or constraints, so it does not improve upon the schema.

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 'search' and the resource 'campaigns', specifying two modes: by keyword or by technique usage. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mitre_get_campaign (get specific campaign) and mitre_list_campaigns (list all).

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 when to use each parameter (keyword vs. technique), but does not explicitly provide when-not-to-use or alternatives. For example, it could mention that for a specific campaign ID, use mitre_get_campaign. The guidance is adequate but not thorough.

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