search_sites

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only restates the search action and criteria, without explaining result behavior, pagination, scope of sites searched, authorization needs, or any limitations. These are material gaps for a search tool.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action, resource, and criteria, making it easy to parse quickly.

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, the description is minimally viable but still incomplete. There is no output schema, so the return shape is undocumented, and the description does not explain what data is returned for each match or whether results are limited. It provides enough to invoke the tool but not enough to fully understand the result.

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 schema only defines query as a string with no semantic description. The description adds essential meaning by indicating that the query searches against site name and description. This is sufficient to understand the primary parameter's role, though it does not specify matching semantics such as partial, case-insensitive, or wildcard behavior.

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 a specific action ('Search'), a specific resource ('SharePoint sites'), and the filtering criteria ('by name/description'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as get_site_by_path, list_sub_sites, and search_files.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer search_sites over get_site_by_path, list_sub_sites, or search_query, and it provides no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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