autotask_search_ticket_notes

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the critical behavioral constraint about per-integration API threshold when iterating across many tickets. It does not cover other aspects like pagination behavior or result format, but the threshold warning is valuable.

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?

Two sentences: first clearly states purpose, second provides critical usage warning. No extraneous words. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what the search returns (e.g., list of notes, pagination info, fields). It only warns about thresholds but doesn't describe the return format or any limitation other than threshold. Incomplete for a search 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 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 resource 'notes on a specific ticket'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like autotask_get_ticket_note (which retrieves a single note) and autotask_create_ticket_note (which creates) by focusing on search. The warning about API threshold adds specificity.

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 explicit guidance to scope the parent list first due to API threshold limits, which is a key when-not-to-use hint. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools for other scenarios (e.g., use get_ticket_note for a single note).

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