입찰공고 검색

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

Annotations already declare readOnly and openWorld hints. Description adds valuable default behaviors: when bidKind is unspecified, it searches four categories excluding 'etc'; startDate defaults to last 30 days if not provided. No contradictions.

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?

Description is concise (two main sentences) and front-loaded with the core function. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy.

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 12 parameters (none required) and no output schema, the description covers main use case and default behaviors. Missing details on pagination and response format, but still sufficient for a search tool with good annotations.

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%, so description doesn't need to detail each parameter. But it adds meaning by explaining the default bidKind search behavior (excludes etc) and the automatic date range, which go beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches bid notices by various criteria (keyword, dates, institution, region, industry, price). It distinguishes from sibling tool get_bid_notice by specifying that the latter is for single notice details.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: to find a list of notices matching conditions. Provides alternative: use get_bid_notice when notice number is known. Also explains default behavior for bidKind and how to include 'etc'.

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