autotask_search_tickets

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 the pagination limit (Max 500/page), which is a behavioral constraint. However, it lacks other behavioral details such as rate limits, data freshness, or any side effects. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no wasteful words. It front-loads the core purpose and essential constraints.

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 has 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is relatively brief. It mentions pagination and references get_ticket_details for full data, but does not describe the return format, how to navigate pagination beyond max page size, or any other contextual details. Adequate but leaves gaps.

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 91%, so the schema itself documents most parameters. However, the description mentions 'queue' and 'priority' as filters, but these are not present in the input schema, creating a potential mismatch. This reduces clarity and adds minimal value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is lowered due to this inaccuracy.

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 tickets with specific filters (company, queue, status, priority) and distinguishes itself from sibling get_ticket_details for full data. The verb 'Search' and resource 'tickets' are explicit, and the sibling differentiation is present.

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 guidance on when to use this tool (to search tickets) and when to use an alternative (autotask_get_ticket_details for full data). It also mentions the max pagination size (500 per page). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide exclusions relative to other search tools.

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