passgage_search

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

The description gives no behavioral details beyond the basic action of searching. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, but it does not disclose whether the search is read-only, how results are grouped, whether pagination is used, or any authentication requirements. For a tool named 'search' it's safe to infer read-only, but that is an assumption, not transparent disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It effectively communicates the core purpose in a compact form, aligning with the conciseness rubric.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should clarify what the response looks like (e.g., grouped by resource, result counts, pagination). The one-sentence description leaves these aspects unaddressed, making it insufficiently complete for an agent to anticipate the tool's full behavior.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for all three parameters, including the default behavior of 'resources' (default: all). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already explains, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Universal search across multiple Passgage resources' clearly identifies the tool as a search operation spanning multiple resource types. It distinguishes itself from the many resource-specific list/get siblings, but could be more explicit about which resources are included.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many list/get siblings. Since the sibling list contains tools like passgage_list_users and passgage_get_user, it would be helpful to mention that this search is for cross-resource queries, but the description omits any usage context.

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