search_tickets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely says 'search' without mentioning return format, pagination, authentication, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool that could query and return data.

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 with no wasted words. However, it lacks structure such as examples or parameter details, so while it is concise, it is also under-specified.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description should at least explain the query format and return behavior. It provides none of this, making it insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 input schema has a single `query` parameter with no description, and the description does not clarify its syntax or semantics. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but only says 'search for tickets,' leaving the query format entirely unspecified.

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 states the tool searches for tickets in Freshdesk, providing a clear verb and resource. However, it is nearly identical to the tool name and does not differentiate from siblings like get_tickets or search_contacts, offering no specifics on scope or search behavior.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_tickets or other search tools. The description implies a search use case but provides no context or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess.

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