Search CMDB

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions the search is by name (partial match) and lists return fields, but does not state whether the operation is read-only, pagination behavior, or any side effects. For a search tool, more transparency is needed.

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, efficient and front-loaded with the action. No wasted words, though could potentially include more detail without losing conciseness.

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 has 2 parameters (1 required), no output schema, and no annotations. The description lists return fields, but lacks details on case sensitivity, wildcards, ordering, or pagination. Adequate for a simple search but not fully complete.

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 coverage is 50% (only 'name' has a description). The description adds context that the search is by name and partial match, but does not elaborate on the 'limit' parameter beyond what the schema provides. The description adds some value but not fully compensates for the low coverage.

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 it searches the CMDB for configuration items by name and lists the returned fields (name, class, category, status, IP, serial number). It is distinct from sibling tools which are all incident-related.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied by the purpose, but it lacks explicit context for decision-making.

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