search_workbooks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions searching by name and returning matching workbooks, but omits critical behavioral details such as case sensitivity, partial matching behavior, pagination, sorting, or what happens when no results are found.

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 extremely concise with a clear, front-loaded purpose and a structured list of arguments. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema, the description's note on returns is acceptable. However, it lacks details on search behavior (e.g., exact vs. fuzzy match) and does not mention any constraints or error conditions. For a simple search tool, it is minimally adequate but has notable gaps.

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 description explains both parameters: 'query' is a search term for workbook names, and 'limit' is the maximum results (default 20). This adds meaning beyond the input schema, which has no property descriptions (0% schema coverage). A minor deduction for not stating that 'limit' is optional or its range.

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 'Search for workbooks by name', which is a specific verb (search) and resource (workbooks) with an explicit scope (by name). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_workbooks' (which likely lists all) and 'get_workbook' (which retrieves by ID).

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. It does not mention when not to use it, prerequisites, or cases where a different tool (e.g., 'list_workbooks' for unfiltered listing) would be more appropriate.

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