search-spans

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens on empty results. The operation is essentially undocumented beyond the basic purpose.

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, efficiently conveying the core purpose and filter dimensions. However, it could benefit from a slight structure (e.g., breaking into purpose and features).

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 the absence of an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., a list of spans/traces with fields). It does not. Also, with many sibling tools, more guidance on when to use search-spans versus other search tools would be valuable. The description is incomplete for a search tool.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds high-level filtering hints (service, resource, status, duration) but these are already implied by the query parameter example. It does not add significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 the tool searches APM spans/traces for performance analysis and lists specific filterable fields (service, resource, status, duration), making it distinct from sibling search tools like search-logs or search-rum-events.

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 performance analysis with APM data, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search-logs), nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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