Search the AgentIndex for AI agents, MCP servers, A2A agents, and x402-gated APIs by capability keyword. Returns ranked results with type, description, URL, and tags.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| type | No | Filter by resource type: application/mcp-server-card+json, application/ai-skill, application/openapi+json, etc. | |
| limit | No | Max results (default 10, max 50) | |
| capability | Yes | Capability or keyword to search (e.g. trading, data retrieval, mcp) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations; description states results are ranked but doesn't mention idempotency, auth needs, or side effects. Provides some behavioral insight into output structure.
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 concise sentences, front-loaded with key action and result description, no fluff.
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 no output schema, description adequately explains return fields. Covers all essential aspects for a search tool with 3 parameters.
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 descriptions already do the work. The tool description adds context about searched resources but no new parameter semantics beyond the schema.
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?
Clearly states it searches the AgentIndex for specific resource types (AI agents, MCP servers, etc.) by capability keyword, distinguishing it from sibling 'get_agent_profile'.
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?
Implies usage for discovery by keyword, but lacks explicit exclusion or when-not-to-use compared to 'get_agent_profile'.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose: bulk export, individual profile retrieval, demand preview vs. full report, endpoint change alerts, liveness history, trust score, and search. No overlapping functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with lowercase and underscores (get_*, bulk_export, search_agents). No mixed conventions or irregular naming.
8 tools is well-scoped for an agent index service, covering search, retrieval, export, and monitoring without excess or redundancy.
The tool set covers the full lifecycle of interacting with an agent index: search, retrieve profiles, bulk export, monitor changes, and assess liveness/trust/demand. No obvious gaps in functionality.