lanhu_search_projects

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

没有提供注释，因此描述承担全部行为披露责任。描述仅说‘按名称关键词搜索’，但未透露搜索是否匹配子串、是否分页、返回数量限制、是否可能无结果或失败模式等。对于一个搜索工具，缺少这些行为细节可能让代理产生错误预期。

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?

一行简洁的描述，直接陈述核心功能，无冗余信息。信息前置且易于理解。

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?

工具简单且有输出模式，但缺少关于搜索行为（如大小写、模糊性、结果排序）的说明。对于基本使用可能足够，但未覆盖所有代理可能需要的执行细节，尤其没有注释的情况下。

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?

输入模式覆盖率为100%，两个参数均有说明。描述中‘按名称关键词’重复了 keyword 参数的含义，但未增添新语义。由于模式已完整，基线为3，描述未提供额外价值。

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?

描述明确说明了工具的作用：在团队下（team_id）按名称关键词（keyword）搜索项目。动词具体（搜索），对象清楚（项目），且与兄弟工具（如 lanhu_get_projects）区分明确。

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?

描述未提供任何使用场景或与其他工具的对比。未说明何时用搜索而非获取项目列表，也未提及排除条件或前置要求。虽然参数架构中提及 team_id 来自 lanhu_get_teams，但这不算是使用指南，仅是参数说明。

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