basecamp_index_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the 'index' and 'fast lookup', which suggests a local, possibly stale cache, but it does not disclose that the index must be built first (via basecamp_index_build), that results may not reflect live data, or what the return format is. These are significant missing behavioral traits.

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, front-loaded sentence: 'Search projects by name in the index (fast lookup)'. It is concise, clear, and contains no wasteful words. Every component earns its place.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), but the description leaves out important context: that the index is a separate artifact that must be built and maintained, and what the search returns (e.g., project IDs, full project objects). For an agent to use this correctly, it needs to know the index workflow and the expected result shape.

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 already fully describes the single 'query' parameter as a fuzzy match on project name (100% schema coverage). The description aligns with this by confirming the search is by name, but it adds no extra semantic detail such as case sensitivity, minimum length, or wildcard support. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 for projects by name ('Search projects by name'), specifying the resource (projects) and the action (search). It adds 'in the index (fast lookup)', which hints at a distinct behavior from other project-related tools, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like basecamp_find_project or basecamp_list_projects.

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 phrase 'fast lookup' implies this is intended for quick project name searches, but the description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. Coverage of usage context is minimal and mostly implicit.

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