autotask_search_resources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses default page size (25) and pagination via page parameter, but omits details about response format, rate limits, read-only nature, or error handling. It is adequate but not thorough.

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-loading the core purpose and then adding pagination detail. Every sentence is informative and there is no redundancy.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks details on response format, sorting, filtering behavior, and the meaning of isActive. It is insufficient for an agent to fully understand usage and outcomes.

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 description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 60%, with isActive and page lacking descriptions. The description does not compensate for these gaps, thus adds minimal value.

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 states 'Search for resources (users) in Autotask', specifying the verb 'search' and the resource 'resources/users'. It distinguishes from sibling search tools (e.g., search_companies) by the target entity, and mentions pagination behavior.

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 implicitly indicates usage for resource searches via name and description, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other search tools or provide exclusion criteria. The clarity is high but lacks explicit guidance.

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