Recherche FFBB (multi-index)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds moderate value by explaining the search is multi-index and results contain an 'id', but does not significantly expand behavioral context beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise, using bullet points for clarity, and front-loads the main purpose. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or extra fluff.

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 complexity as a multi-index search with 5 parameters, and the presence of full annotations and output schema, the description is complete. It covers the search scope, type filtering, and how to use results, which is sufficient for effective tool selection.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by elaborating on the 'type' parameter with examples (e.g., 'organismes' for clubs only) and specifying the default 'all'. Other parameters (query, limit, etc.) are adequately described in the schema.

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 it is a multi-index search for FFBB data, listing specific entity types (clubs, competitions, etc.) and directing to use 'all' as best entry point. It distinguishes from siblings by noting results contain an 'id' for use with ffbb_get or ffbb_club.

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 provides clear context on when to use this tool (as the primary entry point for searching) and how to filter by type. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for specific lookups beyond the mention of using results with ffbb_get/ffbb_club.

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