search_requests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full transparency burden. It only mentions filtering but omits behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, pagination behavior, or rate limits. The description is too brief to disclose important operational nuances.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and filters. It is concise without unnecessary words, though it could be more structured (e.g., listing parameters explicitly).

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 high schema coverage and no output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of request objects) or mention pagination. It lacks sufficient context for an agent to fully understand the tool's scope.

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 already documents all parameters. The description adds context by grouping filter types (method, content, headers, date range, type) that map to the query parameter and request_type. This adds marginal value but is not extensive.

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 it searches requests with query filters, specifying resource (requests) and action (search). However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like get_webhook_requests or get_latest_request, which also retrieve requests but with less filtering.

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 implies usage for filtered searching but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings, such as simple listing or waiting for requests. No when-not or alternative recommendations are given.

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