Search Plone Content

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering but omits pagination behavior (b_size/b_start), default results when no filters applied, and whether the operation is read-only. This is insufficient transparency for an AI agent.

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 concise with one sentence and an example. It is front-loaded and efficient, though could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing filter options). No waste.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return format, pagination mechanics, behavior when filters are combined, and edge cases (e.g., empty query). The example helps but does not cover the tool's full complexity.

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 100% with descriptions for all 8 parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds an example demonstrating usage of query, portal_type, and review_state, but does not elaborate on parameter formatting or constraints 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 clearly states the verb 'Performs a detailed search' and the resource 'content items', listing key filters (text, content type, path, workflow state). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools that create, update, or delete content, though it does not explicitly differentiate from plone_get_content.

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 provides an example but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like plone_get_content. It lacks explicit guidance on conditions for use or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer suitability.

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