search_fcc

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any rate limits, pagination behavior, or what happens when multiple search parameters are combined. This is a significant gap 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 two sentences, each providing essential information. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second details the return content. No extraneous words or repetition.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is adequate but incomplete. It lacks explanation of how search parameters combine, result ordering, and pagination behavior. However, it does list the type of return data (equipment class, grant dates, test reports).

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds that the three search parameters (fccId, granteeCode, applicantName) are alternative ways to look up, but does not explain how they interact if multiple are provided. This adds marginal value over 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 resource 'FCC ID certifications', and specifies lookup by three criteria. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'fcc_details', which likely provides more detailed information on a single certification.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'fcc_details', nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it. It is assumed to be the correct tool for searching, but explicit context is missing.

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