search_predefined_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what the search returns (e.g., list of metric names, objects), any constraints like rate limits, or how results are formatted, making it inadequate for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded. It efficiently states the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 (a search tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameters, return values, and differentiation from siblings, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and use the tool effectively.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about the single 'query' parameter. It doesn't explain what the query should contain (e.g., metric names, keywords), its format, or examples, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 states the action ('Searches for') and target resource ('predefined metrics in einsteinpy.symbolic.predefined'), which is clear but vague. It doesn't specify what 'predefined metrics' are or how they differ from sibling tools like 'create_predefined_metric' or 'create_custom_metric', missing sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'create_predefined_metric' and 'create_custom_metric', there's no indication of whether this tool is for discovery, lookup, or selection, leaving usage context implied at best.

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