search-runs-by-tags

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description's addition of the AND matching logic provides some extra behavioral context. However, it does not disclose return behavior (e.g., empty list on no match), pagination, or error handling.

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, clear, and efficient sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 search tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description omits details about return format, pagination, and result ordering. While concise, it lacks completeness for effective agent usage.

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 50% (experimentIds and tags have descriptions; maxResults and orderBy do not). The description does not supplement any missing parameter information, such as default or allowed values for maxResults or orderBy.

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 'Find runs whose tags match all of the given key/value pairs' uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('runs'), and clearly states the filtering logic (AND over tags). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search-runs' by emphasizing tag-based matching.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'search-runs'. It does not specify constraints, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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