search_nodes

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description explains the matching behavior: substrings against the 'name' attribute using 'name__value' with 'partial_match=True'. This adds useful context about how the search operates.

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 concise and well-structured. First sentence states the purpose, then details matching behavior, contrasts with sibling, and ends with guidance on discovering kinds. Every sentence is essential and front-loaded.

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 the tool's complexity and the presence of output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects: matching mechanism, usage context, and kind discovery. It lacks mention of case sensitivity but is otherwise complete.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that matching is on the 'name' attribute only and mentions internal details like 'name__value' and 'partial_match=True'. The use of 'partial name' in the description reinforces the parameter semantics.

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 states the tool finds nodes by partial name within a specific kind, using specific verbs like 'Find' and 'search'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_nodes' by specifying the exact use case.

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 states when to use ('when you only know part of the name') and when not to use (for matching other attributes or combining filters, use get_nodes). Also provides guidance on discovering available kinds via 'infrahub://schema' resource or 'get_schema' tool.

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