km_search_macros

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

Given no annotations, the description discloses case-insensitive partial match and return fields, which is useful. However, it omits details like behavior on empty results, whether multiple results are returned, or any pagination limits.

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?

Two sentences, directly stating the action and return fields, with no redundant information. Front-loaded with the verb 'Search'.

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 search tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, matching behavior, and output fields sufficiently. No further context needed.

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 single parameter 'query' is well-explained in the schema, and the description adds the 'case-insensitive partial match' behavior not present in the schema, providing additional context.

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 it searches macros by name with case-insensitive partial match and returns name and UID. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like km_list_macros which list all macros.

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 usage for searching by name but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives like km_list_macros. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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