cms_search

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=true, consistent with a search operation. The description discloses the output: 'Returns dataset IDs, titles, and descriptions', adding value beyond annotations. No side effects or constraints are hidden.

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: the first states purpose, the second gives usage guidance. It is front-loaded and contains zero superfluous words, earning a perfect score.

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 description is complete given the tool's simplicity: it explains input, output, and links to the next step (cms_query). No output schema exists, but the return format is described. Minor omission: pagination or result limits are not mentioned, but not critical for a search tool.

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 single parameter 'keyword' is fully described in the input schema (100% coverage) with example values. The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 action: 'Search for CMS provider data datasets by keyword', specifies the resource ('CMS provider data datasets'), and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning CMS focus and directing to 'cms_query' for further data retrieval.

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 clear context: 'Use the ID with cms_query to fetch data' but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., for querying specific datasets directly via cms_hospitals). No alternatives are named, but the flow is implied.

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