search_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Search entities', which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as case sensitivity, partial match behavior, or pagination limits, and there is no mention of rate limits or auth requirements.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no filler. Every word serves a purpose, making it highly concise and efficient for an agent to parse.

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 has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It specifies entity types and sources, which are the key context. However, it could mention the return format or pagination behavior to be fully complete for an agent.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds marginal value by listing entity types and sources, but these are also present in the schema. No additional semantic details like format or constraints are provided.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'entities', and lists specific entity types (people, orgs, equipment, military units) and sources (curated, OpenSanctions). This differentiates it from sibling tools that focus on messages, events, or statistics.

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 usage for searching entities by name with optional source and type filters, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Siblings like 'unified_search' or 'get_entity' are not mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context.

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