im_search_items

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose behavioral traits such as read-only status, pagination behavior, or rate limits. It merely says 'Search,' implying a read operation, but does not clarify what happens with the limit parameter or the nature of the results. No side effects or constraints are mentioned.

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 efficient sentence that states the action and resource first, then the purpose. No unnecessary words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 8 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the output format, ordering, or what 'items/transactions' entails. The brief note about 'investigating specific transactions' does not fill the gaps.

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 100%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description lists some parameters (reference, date, entity, currency, match status) but does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's action ('Search') and resource ('IntelliMatch items/transactions'), listing specific filter criteria. It distinguishes itself from more specific sibling tools like im_get_unmatched_items or im_get_break_details by being a general search.

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?

The description only says 'Useful for investigating specific transactions,' which is vague and provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like im_get_unmatched_items or im_get_break_details. There is no mention of when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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