Search occasions

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral detail: results are ranked with title matches before description matches, and each group is ordered by date. That ranking behavior is not derivable from the schema or annotations.

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 tight sentences: the core action and return shape come first, then the ranking rule and a usage example. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully states that each match comes back with its dates, and the ranking order is disclosed. For a five-parameter read-only search tool with full schema coverage, this is nearly complete; only the exact result fields remain unspecified.

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 100%, so every parameter (year, limit, query, calendar, holiday_only) is already documented in the schema. The description only restates the keyword and Jalali-year framing without adding format, matching, or edge-case semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search all occasions (monasebat) of a Jalali year by keyword') plus the return shape ('each match with its dates'). It implicitly separates itself from siblings like ti_events and ti_holidays by being keyword-driven, but never names an alternative explicitly.

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 example 'when is Teacher's Day' gives a concrete usage context, which is helpful. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer ti_events, ti_holidays, or ti_on_this_day instead, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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