Catalogue Homeoceutics / Homeoceutics Catalog

Catalogue des infoceutiques / Infoceutics catalog

search_infoceutiques

Read-onlyIdempotent

FR : Rechercher ou parcourir les titres des infoceutiques du catalogue public. EN: Search or browse infoceutic titles in the public catalog.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	FR : Taille de page. EN: Page size.
`query`	No	FR : Texte recherché dans l’index complet ; omettre pour parcourir par titre. EN: Text searched in the full index; omit to browse by title.
`locale`	No	FR : Langue demandée ; les titres indisponibles sont repliés vers le français. EN: Requested language; unavailable titles fall back to French.	fr
`offset`	No	FR : Décalage de page, à reprendre depuis pagination.next_offset. EN: Page offset, continued from pagination.next_offset.
`statut`	No	FR : Statut de visibilité anonyme à filtrer. EN: Anonymous visibility status to filter by.
`categorie`	No	FR : Identifiant exact d’une catégorie, réutilisable depuis categories[].id. EN: Exact category identifier, reusable from categories[].id.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	Yes	FR : Titres et métadonnées uniquement. EN: Titles and metadata only.
`locale`	Yes	FR : Langue demandée pour cette page. EN: Locale requested for this page.
`pagination`	Yes	FR : Pagination déterministe par offset. EN: Deterministic offset pagination.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that, mainly the 'public catalog' scope, but does not describe any extra behavior such as result handling or fallbacks.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact, bilingual, and front-loaded with the action and resource. Every sentence earns its place, and the FR/EN duplication is intentional for the target audience.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the rich schema, the output schema, and the annotations, the description is nearly complete for safe invocation. It could more explicitly steer between this tool and search_fiches_information, but the public-catalog and titles context is enough for an agent to proceed correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

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 six parameters, including pagination offsets, locale fallback, and category filtering. The description itself adds no parameter-level detail, which is acceptable per the baseline for full schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb pair ('search or browse') and a specific resource ('infoceutic titles in the public catalog'), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling search_fiches_information, but the public-catalog/titles scope is distinct enough to avoid major ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly states the tool is for searching or browsing infoceutic titles in the public catalog, giving the agent a concrete usage context. It does not mention when not to use it or point to alternatives, but the public-catalog and title scope is sufficient guidance for basic selection.

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

All Catalogue Homeoceutics / Homeoceutics Catalog tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

The two tools are clearly distinct by content type: one searches information-card titles, the other searches infoceutic titles. No overlap or ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tool names follow the same 'search_' + plural noun pattern, making the naming scheme predictable and consistent.

Tool Count3/5

With only 2 tools, the set feels thin, even though each tool covers one of the two catalog categories. It is borderline but not excessively under-scoped.

Completeness3/5

The catalog domain would naturally benefit from retrieval of full details for individual items, not just title search. The tools cover only title-level browsing, leaving notable gaps for agents needing complete catalog information.

Resources

Need Help?