Search Stored Procedures by Content

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states it searches for text/patterns, but does not disclose important details: the search scope (all schemas?), search method (LIKE, full-text?), performance implications, or side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's 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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without verbosity. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices completeness (e.g., no explanation of results). It earns its place but could be slightly more informative without being wordy.

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 has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of procedure names, with or without definitions). Given the complexity of a search tool, this omission makes the description incomplete for an agent to properly utilize the 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, meaning each parameter is documented in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema; it does not clarify formats, defaults, or relationships between parameters. Thus, 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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'stored procedures', specifying it searches for text or patterns in SQL definitions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_stored_procedures' (which lists names) and 'get_stored_procedure_definition' (which retrieves full definition by name), making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it, prerequisites, or comparison with siblings like 'get_all_stored_procedure_definitions' or 'describe_stored_procedure'. The usage context is implied but not explicit.

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