cs_search_wikidata_entity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format ('List of dicts with entity information'), includes an example call, and notes the default language. While it doesn't explicitly state read-only behavior or rate limits, the search context implies a safe operation and the return structure adds value beyond the schema.

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 well-structured with headings, bullet lists, and an example. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary but each section earns its place. The purpose phrase is repeated ('Search for any entity' and 'General-purpose entity search'), which is minor 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?

For a simple search tool, the description covers everything needed: purpose, when to use and when not, parameters, return format, and a concrete example. It also differentiates from sibling tools (occupation/GND/GeoNames searches), ensuring the agent has full context.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining each parameter in the 'Args' section: query as the search term, limit as max results, and language as a code with default 'de'. It also clarifies the return structure, giving full semantic meaning.

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 opens with 'Search for any entity in Wikidata', using a specific verb and resource. The PURPOSE section further clarifies it as a general-purpose entity search, and the WHEN NOT TO USE section explicitly distinguishes it from occupation-specific search (cs_search_for_wikidata_occupation).

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?

Explicit 'WHEN TO USE' and 'WHEN NOT TO USE' sections provide clear conditions and name alternative tools (e.g., 'search_for_wikidata_occupation()' for occupations), making it easy for an agent to choose correctly.

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