capterra_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses credential-free access, proxied browser rendering, and the fallback behavior (no empty-results page). Lacks details on rate limits or failure modes, but the key behavioral quirk is well-explained.

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 sentences plus a note, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose/returns, data source, and critical behavioral note. No fluff, front-loaded with most important information.

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 a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, data source, and a notable behavioral characteristic. Could mention response ordering or pagination but not essential given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Only one parameter 'q' with schema description 'Search query'. Schema coverage is 100%, so description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'search Capterra products' and lists returned fields (id, name, url, description, rating). Differentiates from capterra_product and capterra_reviews by focusing on search results.

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 crucial guidance on interpreting fallback results for no-match queries, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools for when to use search vs. product/reviews. Sibling names imply context, but explicit alternatives would be clearer.

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