Search public VibeDesign ready-made templates, layouts, components, dashboards, animations and source links from the Wikivibe catalog.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | Search phrase. Optional when category, stack or sourceType is provided. | |
| stack | No | Technology or tool, for example React, Tailwind, Figma. | |
| locale | No | ru | |
| category | No | Template category slug, for example landing, dashboards, components, animations. | |
| sourceType | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly indicates a read-only search operation, which is consistent with the tool name. However, it lacks details about result format, pagination, sorting, or any potential side effects, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.
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?
The description is a single sentence that concisely lists what is searchable. It wastes no words and is front-loaded with the action 'Search'. However, it could be slightly more concise by grouping similar items.
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?
Given the complexity of a search tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return value structure, result ordering, or pagination. Sibling tools like search_articles might provide a more complete pattern, but this description lacks essential contextual details.
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?
The input schema has 50% parameter description coverage (query, stack, category have descriptions). The tool description adds no extra meaning to any parameters; for example, it does not explain that query is optional when other filters are used, or that locale defaults to 'ru'. The description fails to leverage schema parameters effectively.
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 clearly identifies the tool as searching for design templates from the Wikivibe catalog, listing specific categories like templates, layouts, components. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_design_template (which retrieves a single template) and search_articles (which searches different content), but does not explicitly differentiate.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_articles or get_design_template. It simply states what it does without context on appropriate use cases or exclusions.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: get for single items, list for collections, search for finding, and recommend for project-based suggestions. No two tools have overlapping purposes.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., get_article, search_skills). The verbs and nouns are clearly descriptive and uniform across the set.
With 9 tools, the set is well-scoped for a public knowledge server covering articles, design templates, and AI skills. Each tool serves a clear role without redundancy or overload.
The tool set provides comprehensive read and search operations for all three content types, plus a recommendation feature. Minor gaps exist, such as no listing of all articles by section or pagination support, but core workflows are covered.
