search_managers

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It clearly states the data limitation (research data only) and the constraint that positions are disclosed, not reflecting intent. This is a strong disclosure for a search tool.

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?

Description is brief but front-loaded with the critical caveat. It uses clear sections for args and returns. Slightly more verbose than necessary but still efficient.

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?

For a simple search tool with only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the data disclaimer, parameter semantics, and return structure adequately. No output schema is needed as description details the response format.

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 coverage is 50% (one described, one not). Description adds examples for 'query' and explains 'limit' range and default, going beyond the schema. However, both parameters are simple, and the schema already covers constraints.

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?

Clearly states it searches institutional 13F filers by name, with case-insensitive substring search and minimum 2 chars. Distinguishes from siblings like 'find_similar_managers' and 'list_all_managers' by specifying the search scope and data constraints.

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 explicitly warns that data is research-only and not to infer intent. However, it does not contrast with siblings (e.g., when to use this vs 'find_similar_managers') nor specify when not to use it.

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