search_articles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds that it searches articles but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, or result format. With annotations covering the safety profile, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the core purpose and adds a usage hint, making it concise and well-structured.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks coverage of parameters and fails to set expectations around how the search works (e.g., query meaning, limit behavior). Given the simplicity of the tool and the presence of siblings, more context is needed for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameter semantics. However, the description only says 'Search Help Center knowledge-base articles' without any mention of the query or limit parameters, adding no meaning beyond what the schema provides. This is a major gap.

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 'Search Help Center knowledge-base articles', a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from a potential generic read tool by saying 'Prefer this over reading the whole zendesk://knowledge-base resource', making its purpose unambiguous and well-differentiated from siblings.

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 provides a usage preference: 'Prefer this over reading the whole zendesk://knowledge-base resource', indicating when to use this tool vs. a generic read. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives by name or provide when-not-to-use scenarios, leaving some ambiguity.

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