search_technologies

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It reveals that the tool is free and uses no credits, but does not specify if it's read-only, any rate limits, or output behavior. Some behavioral info present but not comprehensive.

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, well-structured sentence. It front-loads the category ('Reference data') and provides key details concisely. No unnecessary words.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, cost implications, and usage context. It could mention result format but is largely complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 one parameter 'keyword' described as 'Keyword to search technologies'. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema, stating 'search for technology names by keyword'. Baseline score applied due to high schema coverage.

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 action (search), resource (technology names), and purpose (find valid filter values). It distinguishes from siblings like 'lookup_technology' and 'search_technology_categories' by focusing on keyword search for filter values.

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 specifies it is 'Reference data' and 'free, no credits', indicating suitable usage context without cost. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use, the 'Reference data' label implies it's for lookup purposes, differentiating it from other tools.

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