organizations_search

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions search and returns, omitting pagination behavior, search algorithm (fuzzy vs exact), authentication needs, or side effects. The tool's behavior is minimally described.

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 (two sentences) but at the cost of completeness. It is front-loaded but lacks sufficient detail, so it is not optimally informative for its length.

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 has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to clarify search semantics, pagination, or return format, and does not address the presence of a near-identical sibling 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter, but the description adds no enrichment beyond 'name or other fields', which maps to the 'fields' parameter. It does not explain the 'term' parameter, 'exact_match' behavior, or pagination parameters, leaving ambiguity.

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 states it searches organizations by name or other fields, which is clear but does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'search_organizations' that likely performs a similar function. The verb 'search' is used but the tool's unique role among siblings is ambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'organizations_list', 'search_organizations', or 'search_universal'. The description lacks context for decision-making.

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