Search Tools

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds behavioral details about the search mechanism (semantic similarity via ChromaDB) and knowledge graph expansion. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-organized with a purpose statement, args detail, and examples. While somewhat lengthy, it is front-loaded with the main purpose and each section adds value. Minor redundancy in repeating args that are in schema, but overall structure is good.

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, the description provides a detailed example of the return format, including JSON structure and stats. It explains the mechanism (ChromaDB, KG) and covers all relevant aspects for a tool with 4 parameters and no nested objects.

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 baseline is 3. The description includes an 'Args' section that repeats schema information and adds examples, but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema. The example return format is helpful but not required for parameter semantics.

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 states the tool searches for relevant tools using Vector Search and Knowledge Graph. It specifies the types of items found (MCP servers, skills, tools) and distinguishes from siblings like toolhub_expand, toolhub_health, and toolhub_cluster.

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 explicitly says 'Use this tool when you need to find which tools are relevant for a task' and provides examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with siblings, though context implies that for expansion or cluster operations different tools should be used.

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