trawl_prompts_search_live

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no indication of auth requirements, rate limits, whether results are live or cached, or what the response looks like. The word 'live' in the tool name hints at an external call but the description never confirms or explains it.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, so nothing is wasted. It is efficient but so terse that brevity crosses into under-specification.

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 six parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should at minimum sketch the return shape and clarify the difference from related prompt tools. One sentence leaves an agent guessing on the essentials.

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 coverage is 100% and all six parameters (query, tag, sort, type, limit, category) are documented in the schema itself, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning such as how filters combine or what empty results look like.

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 gives a clear verb ('Search') and resource ('prompt templates') scoped to the prompts.chat API, which is more than a tautology. However, it does nothing to distinguish this tool from the sibling 'trawl_prompts_find', leaving the agent unable to tell which search entry point to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (API key, network access), and no reference to the alternative 'trawl_prompts_find' or 'trawl_prompts_get'. The agent must infer context from the name alone.

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