search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or default sorting. For a search tool, these are important for the agent to invoke correctly.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the purpose and is appropriately sized for a straightforward search tool.

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 that the schema covers parameter details and there is no output schema, the description is somewhat complete for a basic search intent. However, it lacks information on pagination, result ordering, or behavior when no results are found. The tool has moderate complexity (nested object, multiple optional filters), so more guidance 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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for all parameters (q, limit, models, offset, table_db_id, collection_id), making schema coverage high. The description adds minimal value by listing entity types, which is redundant with the models enum. Therefore, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it searches for cards, dashboards, collections, tables, databases, actions, and indexed entities in Metabase. It uses a specific verb and resource list, distinguishing it from sibling tools that search for specific parameter values (e.g., search_card_param_values). However, it could be more explicit about the scope (e.g., 'full-text search across Metabase').

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 vs. alternative search tools (e.g., search_field_values, search_card_param_values). The sibling list includes many specific search functions, but the description does not clarify that this is the general search tool covering multiple entity types.

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