searchPages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint as true. The description adds that it returns metadata and does not request destructive behavior, which is consistent. It adds minor value beyond annotations by specifying the return type.

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 with zero waste. The main action is front-loaded, and the follow-up guidance is concise. Perfect length for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool's simplicity (two parameters, no output schema, clear annotations), the description adequately covers purpose, output, and next steps. It could mention that search is limited to titles, but overall sufficient.

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 does not explain parameters beyond implying the query. The maxResults parameter and its constraints are left unaddressed, failing to add meaning beyond the schema's types and default.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('page titles across OneNote'), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like listPages and getPage. It also mentions the output is metadata and directs to getPage for full content, avoiding confusion.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose and advises using getPage for reading a result. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like listPages or mention when not to use it, though the context with sibling tools implies the distinction.

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