Search items / articles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the endpoint and basic action, omitting any information about read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. This lack of detail makes it hard for an agent to anticipate tool behavior.

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 concise, consisting of a single sentence that includes the action, resource, and endpoint. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information, though it could benefit from slightly more context without sacrificing conciseness.

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 tool has 4 parameters with no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention the return format, pagination behavior, or provide usage examples. While the schema covers parameter details, the description itself lacks sufficient context for an agent to fully understand the tool's 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 action ('Search') and resource ('items / articles') along with the HTTP endpoint. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like bexio_list_items or bexio_search_contacts, which could cause confusion about when to use this specific tool.

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 that this tool is used for searching items with field criteria, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., bexio_list_items for listing without criteria). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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