console_advanced_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior, but only states it is a 'search' operation. It does not disclose whether it is read-only, what it returns, potential side effects, or any limitations. This is insufficient for a tool with nested options and no annotation context.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the key phrase 'Advanced console search' and then lists the specific features. Every word contributes to the message, with no redundancy or filler, making it exceptionally concise while still conveying the tool's core purpose.

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 moderate complexity (nested objects, correlation, statistics) and the absence of an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns or how results are presented. It only lists features without describing the output or usage context, leaving a significant gap for agents to understand 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 detailed descriptions for every parameter (100% coverage), including definitions for 'patterns', 'correlate', and 'includeStats'. The description's mention of 'pattern matching, correlation, and statistics' merely summarizes the schema without adding new information, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 performs 'Advanced console search' with specific capabilities ('pattern matching, correlation, and statistics'), providing a specific verb, resource, and scope. This distinguishes it from the sibling 'console_search' which likely handles simpler queries.

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 word 'advanced' implies this tool is intended for complex search scenarios, and the presence of a sibling 'console_search' suggests a simpler alternative, but the description provides no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance. It does not name alternatives or state exclusions, leaving usage largely implied rather than clearly directed.

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