search_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool searches three resource types; it does not mention pagination, result limits, ordering, read-only guarantees, or any other behavior. The existence of an output schema covers return shape but not behavioral traits.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the key differentiator ('in one request') is included without added bulk.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with an output schema, the core behavior is broadly understandable. However, the absence of annotations and usage guidance leaves an agent to infer when to use this combined search versus the individual search siblings, and behavioral details like pagination or limits are unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the parameter definition. It gives no extra meaning beyond the schema's 'query' string field, such as matching behavior, formatting requirements, or example values. The single parameter is self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic depth.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and explicitly names the three resource types covered: albums, artists, and labels. The phrase 'in one request' clearly differentiates it from the sibling tools search_albums, search_artists, and search_labels.

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 implies the use case: a combined search across albums, artists, and labels in a single request. Sibling names make the narrower alternatives obvious, but the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over them or provide any when-not-to-use guidance.

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