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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses ranking method (LLM read each one), return contents (one-line summary, slug), and browse behavior when query omitted. Could mention pagination details but schema covers offset/limit; still well beyond minimal.

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 sentences, front-loaded with action and resource, includes examples and return info. Every word earns its place, no redundancy.

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?

No output schema, so description must explain return values—it does (one-line summary, slug, ranked best few). Combined with schema details, the description sufficiently covers purpose, usage, behavior, and integration with get_skill.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds minimal parameter semantics beyond schema, mostly repeating that query is in user's words and that omitting it browses top-ranked. No significant added value for limit/offset/category.

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 an explicit verb (Search), resource (Qumge's curated catalog of agent skills / SKILL.md files), and purpose (by what the user wants to accomplish). It distinguishes from siblings by noting result includes the slug to pass to get_skill, and category param references list_categories.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use: 'Use this whenever the user asks for a skill, tool, or capability' with examples. It also provides an alternative/next-step by mentioning the slug is for get_skill, and references list_categories for category browsing.

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