f5-status-search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states what the tool searches and does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or handles errors. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this lack of information is a significant gap, as the agent cannot infer operational details beyond the basic action.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Search F5 Cloud status information') and specifies key details ('by keyword or pattern, including components, incidents, and maintenance'). There is no wasted language or redundancy, making it easy to parse and understand quickly. Every part of the sentence contributes directly to clarifying the tool's purpose.

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 the complexity of a search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It adequately explains what the tool searches but fails to cover important contextual aspects such as the format of search results, handling of no matches, performance characteristics, or integration with sibling tools. Without this information, the agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool effectively in varied scenarios.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for both parameters ('query' and 'type'), including an enum for 'type'. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'keyword or pattern' for the query and listing the searchable entities, but does not provide additional semantics like search syntax, pattern examples, or default behaviors. Given the high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does most of the work.

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 tool's purpose: 'Search F5 Cloud status information by keyword or pattern, including components, incidents, and maintenance'. It specifies the verb ('Search'), resource ('F5 Cloud status information'), and scope ('components, incidents, and maintenance'), making it easy to understand what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'f5-status-get-components' or 'f5-status-get-incidents', which might offer similar functionality without search capabilities.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions what the tool searches ('components, incidents, and maintenance'), but does not indicate scenarios where this search tool is preferred over direct retrieval tools like 'f5-status-get-components' or 'f5-status-get-incidents'. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or specific use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage based on tool names alone.

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