search_by_keyword

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

There are no annotations, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the basic search action without disclosing return format, pagination behavior, or any limitations. As a read operation, it does not explicitly confirm safety or side-effect-free behavior.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the key action, though it is too brief to provide extra context, which slightly reduces its usefulness.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not mention how results are returned, any filtering limitations, or how it differs from sibling tools. The simple parameter set mitigates this slightly, but the description still lacks necessary context.

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%, with both 'keyword' and 'count' already described in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline 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 identifies the action ('search') and the resource ('bidding information') and specifies the method ('by keyword'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling 'search_procurements', which may overlap in functionality.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus search_procurements or get_procurements_by_date. The description lacks any context for tool selection or exclusions.

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