search_institution

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only search operation and output format, but does not mention rate limits, authentication needs, or behavior on errors. Adds minimal context beyond purpose.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. Key information is front-loaded: purpose, input format, filters, output format. Every sentence 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 description covers essential aspects for a simple search tool, but given no output schema and missing details like pagination behavior or handling of empty results, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description's added value is limited. It reiterates bidirectional lookup and filter options, aligning with schema descriptions. Output format mention is helpful but not parameter-specific. 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 public institutions with bidirectional lookup by name or apbaId, supports filters, and specifies output format. It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools by focusing specifically on institutions.

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 usage for searching institutions by name or ID, but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. No guidance on prerequisites or scenarios where other tools are more appropriate.

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