search_aem_assets_api

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

No annotations exist, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions algorithmic features but does not state whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, has side effects, or any rate limits. Search is likely read-only, but this is not explicit.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose and key features. Every word adds value; no redundancy or filler. Appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Description covers the algorithmic approach but lacks important context: return format/ structure, pagination behavior, required permissions, error handling, or example use cases. For a search tool with no output schema and 3 parameters, more contextual detail would be beneficial.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining the hybrid search algorithm (intent weighting, synonym expansion, semantic reranking), which clarifies how the query parameter is processed.

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?

Description clearly states 'Hybrid search for AEM Assets operations' with specific features (intent weighting, synonym expansion, semantic reranking). It uniquely identifies the tool among siblings, all of which are explanatory or context-related, not search tools.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of preconditions, required context, or scenarios where it should not be used. The description implies usage for searching operations but provides no explicit direction.

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