search_findings

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 behavioral disclosure. It only states that it searches and filters, without mentioning return format, pagination behavior, sorting defaults, authentication needs, or how filters combine. The schema documents parameters, but the description adds little beyond the verb and resource.

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 long, front-loads the core purpose, and contains no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes meaning.

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?

With 17 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not explain what the returned findings look like, how multiple filters interact, or what the default sorting and pagination behavior is. The description says 'and more' without elaboration, leaving critical context missing for a complex search tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions filters for keywords, impact, firms, tags, and protocols, which maps to several parameters, but it adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. The phrase 'and more' is vague.

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 Solodit for smart contract security findings and vulnerabilities, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling get_finding_by_id by being a search/filter tool rather than a direct lookup.

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 searching and filtering findings but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_finding_by_id or when not to use it. No alternatives are mentioned, leaving usage context implicit.

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