search-forum

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only restates schema-visible capabilities (filtering, sorting) and does not add context about read-only nature, return format, pagination, or any special constraints. The lack of added value beyond the schema results in a low score.

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-loaded with the primary purpose, and briefly notes supported filters. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's role and capabilities. It mentions topics and posts, and the schema covers parameter details. Minor missing context like default sorting or pagination behavior is not critical but prevents a perfect score.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all seven parameters. The description only summarizes the filter categories (category, user, date, sorting) without adding additional meaning or format details. This aligns with the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 the VEX Forum for topics and posts. The verb 'search' and resource 'VEX Forum' are specific, and it is distinguished from sibling tools like search-teams and search-events by explicitly naming the forum.

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 clear context: it is a forum search tool with filtering and sorting capabilities. While it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, the scope is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it for forum searching.

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