Search AL-Go Specialists

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

Since no annotations exist, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the search operation, but omits details about output format, result limits, pagination, or rate limits. This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects.

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 sentence that conveys the core functionality without any unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimal. However, it lacks details on what the search returns (e.g., list of specialist objects) and how to interpret results. Sibling tools are numerous, and the description does not help distinguish them.

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% for the single parameter. The description adds context by listing searchable fields (name, persona, expertise, keyword), but this closely mirrors the schema's description. Given high schema coverage, baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'AL-Go specialists', mentioning searchable attributes. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like alg-search-discussions or alg-search-issues, which also perform searches over different resources.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as alg-list-specialists or alg-get-specialist. There is no mention of use cases or exclusions.

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