search_toolsSearch the tool catalog by keyword. Returns matching tool names, descriptions, parameters and a tested example argument object for each.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (1-50, default 10) | |
| query | Yes | Search keywords (e.g. "pdf merge", "sha256", "translate", "dns") | |
| category | No | Optional filter: compute, network, file, ai, or a category id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / category / descriptionPrevious value: -"Optional filter: compute, network, file, ai, or a category id from list_categories"New value: +"Optional filter: compute, network, file, ai, or a category id"Input schema / properties / category / descriptionPrevious value: -"Optional category filter: compute, network, file, ai"New value: +"Optional filter: compute, network, file, ai, or a category id from list_categories"Input schema / properties / limitAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Max results (1-50, default 10)",
+ "type": "integer"
+}Input schema / properties / query / descriptionPrevious value: -"Search keyword (e.g. \"pdf merge\", \"hash\", \"translate\", \"dns\")"New value: +"Search keywords (e.g. \"pdf merge\", \"sha256\", \"translate\", \"dns\")"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's added value is the return shape: names, descriptions, parameters, and a tested example argument object. That is genuine disclosure beyond the structured fields, though pagination/ordering behavior goes unmentioned.
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, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the return content following immediately. Nothing can be cut without losing information.
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 exists, so the description correctly takes on the job of describing return values, which it does well for a simple three-parameter search tool. Minor gaps remain around result ordering and empty-result behavior, but nothing essential to invoking it correctly is missing.
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 all three parameters are already documented with examples and defaults. The description only restates the keyword concept and adds no format or filtering nuance beyond the schema, which is the baseline-3 case.
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 states a specific verb and resource ('Search the tool catalog by keyword') and clearly separates itself in function from list_categories (browse) and run_tool (execute). It stops short of explicitly naming or contrasting those siblings, so the differentiation is only implicit.
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?
Usage is implied by 'by keyword' and the keyword examples in the schema, but there is no explicit statement of when to reach for this tool versus list_categories or run_tool, and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.
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.