search_cases

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

With no annotations, the description is expected to disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Search cases' without mentioning pagination, result limits, filtering behavior, or whether it returns full case details. This is minimal disclosure.

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, stating the core action. It could include more specifics but achieves brevity.

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 5 parameters, one required, and no annotations, and the description is only five words. Given the moderate complexity and absence of behavioral details, the description is inadequate for correct invocation without relying on schema field names alone.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the five parameters (domain_id, region, max_results, filter_field, filter_value). It only mentions 'domain' which loosely maps to domain_id, leaving the other parameters semantically unexplained.

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 uses the specific verb 'Search' with resource 'cases' and a domain scope, distinguishing it from contact-specific case listing (cases_list_cases_for_contact) and single-case retrieval (get_case). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other search tools like search_contacts.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus cases_list_cases_for_contact or get_case, or what filtering capabilities exist. The description lacks any contextual recommendation or exclusions.

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