noark5_search_entities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that search is full-text and case-insensitive, limited to title matching, that $filter is ANDed with the search term, and that results include URLs, titles, and types. It could add more about pagination or error behavior, but the core behavioral traits are clearly explained.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, starting with a one-sentence summary, then usage guidance, parameter explanations, and return format. Every sentence carries meaningful information and none repeats schema fields unnecessarily.

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 zero annotations and zero schema descriptions, the description covers purpose, when to use it, parameter semantics, and return format. It also names the relevant sibling tool for the alternative use case, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates. It explains query as a title-matching full-text, case-insensitive term, and filter_str as an optional OData $filter expression with a concrete example. This gives the agent everything needed to construct both arguments correctly.

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 a specific verb and resource: global search across all entity types using a title-matching $search term with optional $filter. It explicitly distinguishes itself from noark5_filter_entities, making its scope easy to understand.

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?

It provides explicit usage guidance: use this tool for global keyword search optionally constrained by a condition, and use noark5_filter_entities instead when filtering a known collection URL from entity links or children. This gives an agent clear decision criteria.

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