findings_search_advanced

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It identifies the operation as a search (read-oriented) and mentions the POST mechanism, but does not describe response shape, pagination, or error behavior. The output schema likely covers some of this, but the description itself is minimal.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the key differentiator ('POST variant') and the use case. No wasted words; every element earns its place.

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 simple pass-through tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description adequately supports selection and invocation. It could mention the target endpoint or expected response, but the schema and output schema fill most remaining gaps.

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 100%, and the schema documents that the body is passed through verbatim. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond implying the body contains filters. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 identifies this as a POST variant of the Findings search, with a specific distinguishing condition: filter payloads too large for a query string. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling findings_search tool by contrasting the transport method.

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 states when to use this tool: when filter payloads are too large for a query string. It does not explicitly name findings_search as the alternative, but the contrast is strongly implied by 'variant of the Findings search'.

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