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

The description explains that detail_level controls the amount of data returned and that it avoids loading all operations at once. Combined with readOnly/destructive annotations, this gives a solid picture of behavior, though output specifics are left to the schema.

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 concise sentences that front-load the purpose and then explain optional parameters and behavior. No redundant or filler content.

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?

The description is complete for a search tool with an output schema, but it does not mention what the response shape is beyond the detail_level behavior. Since an output schema exists, this is acceptable and not a major gap.

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 description covers query, node_types, and detail_level semantics in detail. Limit is not described, and the schema has no parameter descriptions, so there is a minor gap but overall sufficient guidance.

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 the tool searches operations across node types by intent, matching name, description, display_name, and category. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_credentials and gives a precise action.

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?

Provides practical guidance on scoping with node_types, choosing detail_level, and progressive disclosure to avoid loading all operations. It could be stronger by contrasting with get_node_operations, but the instructions are clear enough.

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