get_expert_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly explains that the tool returns search status and, when complete, an array of recommended experts with profiles and AI summaries, and importantly discloses the async behavior: results_pending: true means the backend is still writing, so retry is needed. This is valuable context beyond the schema, though it omits error handling or permission requirements.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes essential async retry info without any filler. Every phrase earns its place.

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 adequately explains the return payload (status, expert array, AI summaries) and the results_pending retry scenario. However, it does not cover potential error conditions or what happens with an invalid ID, so it is complete but not exhaustive.

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 schema already fully describes the only parameter 'id' as 'Expert search ID', so the description adds little beyond 'by ID'. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3; no additional semantic nuance or format details are given in the description.

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 retrieves results for an expert search by ID, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('expert search results'), which differentiates it from sibling tools for keyword and user searches.

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 implies this tool is used after creating an expert search and having its ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_expert_searches or expert_search. The retry hint for results_pending provides operational guidance but not tool-selection guidance.

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