malcolm_field_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions results are sorted alphabetically and that at least one parameter should be provided, but does not discuss other behaviors like error handling, pagination, or rate limits. Adequate for a simple search tool but leaves some gaps.

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?

Extremely concise with no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, followed by usage context, then parameter details. Every sentence adds value.

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's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, when to use, parameter semantics, and result ordering. No further information is needed for an agent to correctly select and invoke this tool.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant meaning: keyword is a substring search, prefix is a field name prefix with examples, field_type filters by type with examples. Also notes at least one parameter required. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the tool searches field names in Malcolm's index, with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like malcolm_field_values by emphasizing it's for verifying field names before querying, and mentions non-standard naming conventions.

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?

Explicitly advises to use this tool before querying to verify field names, providing clear context of use. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is sufficient; could mention alternative tools like malcolm_field_values or malcolm_field_profile for different purposes.

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