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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and there is no contradiction. The description adds search semantics (multi-field matching) and discloses that results are 'short summaries', so the agent knows not to expect full installation details. It does not discuss result ordering or pagination, but those are minor for a read-only registry search.

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?

Three sentences, all substantive and front-loaded: what is searched, what is returned, and what to do next. There is no filler or repetition of schema contents.

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?

For an optional-parameter read-only search with no output schema, the description covers what results look like, how to get richer data, and why to use this before submit_server. Nothing needed to select 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 descriptions cover tag, query, and transport, and the description reinforces what the query can contain (free text or a tool name) by listing the fields searched. Limit and offset lack schema descriptions, but their defaults and bounds are present in the schema, so the description does not need to repeat them.

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 clear verb ('Search') and resource ('the registry for MCP servers'), and specifies the exact match surfaces ('names, titles, descriptions, tags and the names of the tools each server exposes'). It also distinguishes itself from its siblings by noting that get_server is for install instructions and search is a pre-submit duplicate check.

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?

Explicitly routes to get_server for install instructions and instructs to search before submit_server to avoid duplicates. This gives an agent concrete when-to-use context relative to both siblings.

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