motion_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only (likely but not confirmed), any authentication requirements, rate limits, 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 a single, concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words or redundant information.

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 has 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return format, pagination behavior, or how the query matches against fields, leaving significant gaps 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters adequately. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema, resulting in a baseline score.

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), the resource (Motion tasks and projects), and the method (by query). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like motion_tasks and motion_projects that manage entities rather than search across them.

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 motion_tasks or motion_projects. It does not mention any prerequisites, filtering options, or scenarios where search is preferred over direct retrieval.

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