utmt-search

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: case-insensitive substring matching and the return format (JSON array with type, index, name). Since no annotations are provided, this is the sole source of behavior. However, it does not mention edge cases like empty results or potential errors, so it is not fully transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant information. It efficiently conveys the core functionality and output format.

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 description covers the essential aspects of the tool: what it searches, how it matches, and what it returns. Given that there is no output schema, the return format is explicitly stated. However, it does not mention the optional entityTypes filter or behavior on empty results, which are covered in the schema but not in the description. Overall, it is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 for parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides; it mentions case-insensitive matching which duplicates the query parameter description.

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's function with a specific verb ('Search'), resource ('entities in a GameMaker data file'), and scope ('by name pattern'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like utmt-list-entities or utmt-get-entity.

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. There is no mention of scenarios where a user should choose this over the sibling tools, such as when needing to filter by name rather than list all entities.

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