search_cards

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral information. It states the search action and parameter constraints, but does not disclose match semantics (exact vs. partial, case-sensitivity), result ordering, or that the operation is read-only, though that is somewhat implicit in 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 concise and well-structured: a single-sentence purpose statement followed by a clean Args list. Every sentence adds essential information with no wasted words.

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?

For a simple search tool with an output schema (return format already externally defined), the description covers the key invocation details: purpose, all parameters, and optional/default behaviors. It lacks explicit comparison to sibling tools, but is otherwise complete enough to select and invoke the 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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: 'query' as the title search string, 'board_id' as an optional scoping filter, and 'limit' with a default value. This adds meaningful guidance beyond the bare schema property names.

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 opens with 'Search for cards by title', which clearly specifies the action, resource, and attribute. It distinguishes search from simple board/user listings by focusing on title-based search, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools.

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 about searching by title with an optional board filter, implying when it should be used. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling tools like get_board_cards or get_user_cards, nor does it mention exclusions.

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