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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by explaining the 'verified' status and the safety-check criteria, giving agents confidence in result quality. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but the output schema covers return structure.

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?

Three concise sentences, each earning its place: the purpose sentence defines the resource and filter, the second explains trustworthiness, and the third routes to the correct next sibling. Information is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 low-complexity search tool with a rich output schema and safety annotations, the description covers purpose, scope, safety, and next steps. It leaves minor gaps such as behavior with no query and explicit differentiation from search_plugins, but the core invocation needs are met.

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 both query and plugin are already well documented. The description restates 'by keyword' and 'parent plugin' in prose but adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Search'), a precise resource ('Sigistry catalog of verified skills'), and the optional plugin filter. It also clarifies that skills are SKILL.md instruction sets, distinguishing it clearly from sibling tools like search_plugins and get_skill.

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 clearly positions search as the discovery entry point and explicitly directs the agent to use get_skill for fetching the source of a match. It does not explicitly contrast with search_plugins or list_categories, so it stops short of full when-to-use guidance for all siblings.

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