search_by_slot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only gives the basic operation and parameter names without detailing matching behavior (exact/partial), case sensitivity, search scope, or side effects. This is insufficient for a search tool.

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 concise with a single purpose sentence and a minimal Args list. No filler or redundant information, and the key statement is front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple but lacks annotations and has only a minimal description. It fails to mention search semantics, output details (though output schema exists), or folder path conventions. The description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly without additional assumptions.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description's Args section adds value by explaining slot_name and folder. However, explanations are terse, especially 'Restrict search to folder' which lacks format or scope details.

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 'Find montages using a specific slot', which is a specific verb+resource+search criterion. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_montage_slots (which queries slots of a montage) and other search_by_* 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?

The description implies usage for locating montages by slot but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_by_notify or search_by_curve. No when-not guidance or alternative references are provided.

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