Search Fuxam

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

The description adds the behavioral detail that the upstream result is returned unchanged, which is useful. With readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint already true, the safety profile is covered, but the description does not elaborate on pagination, rate limits, or error behavior, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the core action and behavior, and the second gives concrete usage context. Efficient and well-structured.

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 tool is simple with 4 parameters and no output schema. The description covers purpose, usage timing, and the key behavior of returning the upstream result unchanged. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to know when to call it and what to expect, though it does not specify pagination details available in the schema.

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 50%; only query and types have descriptions. The description mentions entity types but does not clarify limit or offset semantics. Since coverage is not low and defaults are provided, the description adds minimal value beyond the schema, so a baseline 3 is warranted.

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 what the tool does: 'Search Fuxam entities and return the upstream result unchanged.' It lists the entity types it covers and explicitly frames it as a discovery tool before specialized tools, which differentiates it from the sibling list functions.

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?

It provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Use this to discover course, module, term, appointment, and exam IDs before calling specialized tools.' This clarifies its role relative to the specialized siblings, though it does not name specific alternatives or give exclusion conditions.

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