search_objects

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure, but it only states that it searches indexed object metadata. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any permissions required, pagination behavior beyond offset/limit, or potential side effects.

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 focused sentence followed by a structured parameter list. Every sentence earns its place, and the format front-loads the purpose before compact parameter definitions, with no redundant content.

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?

The parameter semantics are well covered and an output schema exists, so return values are not needed. However, it lacks usage context relative to sibling tools and does not describe search behavior such as query syntax, wildcards, or result ordering, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 description provides meaningful explanations for all six parameters despite the schema having 0% description coverage. Each parameter gets a concrete definition (e.g., 'search: Broad search query (e.g. partial file name or type)'), which adds significant value beyond the raw 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 opens with 'Search indexed object metadata in ObjectLens using a query pattern,' specifying both the action (search) and the resource (indexed object metadata). It is clear and distinguishes from list-style sibling tools like list_bucket_objects, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as scan_bucket or list_bucket_objects. The param descriptions imply a general search use case, but the description does not clarify when this tool is preferable over its siblings.

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