search_entities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safe-read behavior is covered. The description adds relevant behavioral context: fuzzy matching, ranking by relevance, and compact summaries. It does not detail pagination behavior for the default all-matches case, but the schema covers a limit parameter, so a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the exclusion guidance is succinctly placed at the end. Every sentence adds value.

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 read-only fuzzy search tool with full parameter coverage and no output schema, the description covers the main agent decision points: what it returns, when to use it, and which siblings to prefer for other cases. A small gap is not spelling out what 'compact summary' contains, but the read-only annotation and simple output expectation make this minor.

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 both parameters meaningfully. The description reinforces the query semantics by saying the name may be partial and that limit caps the results, but it adds only marginal behavioral nuance beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Fuzzy-search entities by name and return the best matches ranked by relevance (each as a compact summary).' It distinguishes this tool from related entity-lookup tools by describing the fuzzy by-name match behavior and the compact-summary return form.

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 says when to use it — 'when you only know part of its name' — and when NOT to use it, naming two sibling alternatives: filter by component or tag (list_entities) and find entities using a script (find_entities_by_script).

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