search_seriesFind manga series on Mangainfo by any title: English, romaji, Japanese or another name. Returns up to 20 series per page, an exact title first, each with its slug, how many volumes are out in English and in Japan, and the next English volume with its date.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | The page of results, 20 per page. Default 1. | |
| query | Yes | A title or part of one, in English, romaji or Japanese. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent safety profile, and the description adds genuinely useful behavior: 20 results per page, exact-title-first ranking, and the specific fields returned (slug, English/Japan volume counts, next English volume and date). Only the empty-result case is left unaddressed.
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?
Two dense sentences with zero filler; the searchable-by-title capability leads and the return contract follows, so the agent gets scope and output shape immediately.
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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so well by enumerating the fields. It is nearly complete for a simple two-parameter search; only no-results behavior and whether pages beyond the last error or return empty are unstated.
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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the 20-per-page default. The description reinforces the multilingual query scope and page size but adds no new syntax or format detail, so the baseline applies.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Find manga series on Mangainfo') plus the key capability: lookup by any title in English, romaji, Japanese or another name. This implicitly separates it from get_series, which the sibling list suggests is a slug-based lookup, but no sibling is named outright.
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 makes the use case inferable — search when you have a title rather than an identifier — but it never states when to prefer get_series or get_series_volumes over this tool, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.