search_content

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

With no annotations available, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'search' without explaining return format, filtering behavior, pagination, limitations, or side effects. The nested schema hints at advanced capabilities, but the description offers no behavioral context beyond the name.

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 short, but the single phrase 'Search for content' is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It does not earn its place because it adds no information beyond the tool name, making it a case of under-specification, not efficiency.

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 nested requestBody schema, enum values, required fields, and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is drastically incomplete. It provides no context about how the tool fits into the broader workspace of sibling tools or what an agent should expect when invoking it.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining the requestBody fields (searchTerm, spaceIds, mode, filterStructureIds). It provides no such explanation, leaving the agent to infer parameter semantics solely from schema structure, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 'Search for content' essentially restates the tool name without adding specificity about what content is searched, in what scope, or how it differs from sibling tools like get_spaces or get_space_info. It is a tautological expression of the name, not a meaningful clarification of purpose.

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 alternatives such as get_spaces or get_space_info. The description does not mention intended use cases, prerequisites, or conditions under which search_content is preferred. There is no misleading information, but also no direction.

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