search_garments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'returns compact records, best match first', which gives some insight into return format and ordering. However, it does not disclose any side effects (likely read-only) or pagination details. A search operation is typically safe, but without annotations, more explicit confirmation would be helpful.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first clause. It wastes no words and gets straight to the point, though it is slightly sparse.

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's relative simplicity (2 parameters, no nested objects, no output schema), the description is nearly adequate. However, it lacks any note on limit behavior or match criteria. With no annotations or output schema, the description could be improved by adding a note on result order and limit usage. It is functional but leaves room for agent uncertainty.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. It only correlates to the 'query' parameter by saying 'free-text search over names, descriptions, and attributes', but it does not explain the 'limit' parameter's meaning or that it controls result count. The default value of 20 is in the schema, but the description adds little clarity for either parameter.

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 (free-text search) and the resource (garments), specifying that it searches over names, descriptions, and attributes. It distinguishes from siblings like list_garments and get_garment by focusing on free-text search and compact records, though it could be more explicit about how it differs from search_narration.

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 when to use it (for free-text search across fields) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. It does not mention that list_garments might be better for browsing or get_garment for retrieving a specific record, but the sibling names give context.

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