Search Assets

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

The description discloses that the tool is not implemented, which is a key behavioral trait, but it does not detail what happens when called (e.g., error message, empty result). Since no annotations are provided, this partial transparency is useful but incomplete.

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 fluff, front-loading the key 'Not implemented' message. However, it is under-specified as a tool description, lacking functional details. It earns its place as a clear status indicator but falls short of being a useful tool description.

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 3 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description should provide more context about intended behavior and alternatives. It tells the agent the tool is not implemented, which is important, but it does not mention what this tool would typically do or suggest using another sibling. The description is incomplete for effective agent decision-making.

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 description adds no meaning to the input schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter semantics, but it provides zero information about 'query', 'limit', or 'assetType' beyond basic schema constraints. The tool's non-implementation status does not help understand parameter usage.

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 explicitly states 'Not implemented', which communicates the tool's non-functionality but does not describe what the tool would do if implemented. It fails to define a clear purpose beyond negating the implied search functionality. The title 'Search Assets' and name suggest a search operation, but the description does not confirm any actual 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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description only says no endpoint is wired up, without specifying when to use or avoid this tool or suggesting any alternative sibling tools. The agent is left without any direction on how to handle asset searching.

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