Stories: Search

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral context beyond 'search'—for example, it does not mention pagination (nextPageToken), result limits, or that it returns a list. The description fails to add value over annotations.

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 extremely short (3 words) but misses critical information. Conciseness should balance brevity with completeness; here, it is under-specified. Every sentence should earn its place, but this lacks substance.

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 45 parameters, no output schema, and no usage guidance, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the search/filter nature, pagination, or what the returned data looks like. The rich schema parameter descriptions partly compensate, but the tool description itself is deficient.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter information beyond the schema's detailed descriptions. Thus, it does not compensate or exceed the baseline.

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 Shortcut stories' clearly states the action (find/search) and resource (stories). However, it does not differentiate from other story retrieval tools like stories-get-by-id or stories-get-by-external-link. The name 'search' implies filtering, which helps distinguish it.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when not to use it, nor does it reference sibling tools like stories-get-by-id for specific story lookup. The agent must infer usage from the parameter set.

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