twitch_search

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden, and it does so well. It discloses that the source is Twitch's search-typeahead surface, that results are a capped suggestion list rather than a fully paginated results page, and that live channels include viewer count and stream title. This gives the agent material behavioral expectations beyond the raw search operation.

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, each earning its place: purpose, results shape, and source/limitation. The content is front-loaded and free of filler, making the critical caveat easy to weigh.

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 low-complexity search tool with no output schema, the description provides enough behavioral and result context to invoke it correctly. The capped, non-paginated caveat is especially important because an agent could otherwise attempt pagination or assume exhaustive search coverage.

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%: query and limit are already described in the input schema, including the default and maximum for limit. The description does not add additional meaning or syntax guidance for the params, so it stays at the baseline.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: search Twitch channels and games/categories. It further clarifies that results are a mixed set of channel and category matches, which distinguishes it from more targeted siblings like twitch_channel, twitch_streams, or twitch_top_games.

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 gives useful context: this is a lightweight typeahead-style search, capped and non-paginated, so it should be used for quick discovery rather than exhaustive result collection. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when-not-to-use scenarios, so the guidance is implied rather than fully articulated.

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