Find provider endpoints by searching API metadata when unified tools lack required capabilities. Enables specialized access beyond standard people discovery.
Find provider endpoints when unified capabilities cannot meet the need. Searches API metadata, not people.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral context. It only states that it searches API metadata, but it does not disclose what a successful result looks like, whether it performs any side effects, or any limitations beyond the schema constraints.
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 extremely concise: two sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core purpose and immediately clarifies scope with the 'not people' note.
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 its simplicity (2 params, no nested objects) and the output schema existence, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain what the output looks like or provide usage examples, leaving some ambiguity about query formulation.
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 0%, and the description does not explain the meaning of 'query' or 'limit' beyond their basic types. The query parameter's purpose is implied but not elaborated, and limit is left entirely to the schema defaults.
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's purpose: to find provider endpoints when unified capabilities are insufficient. It explicitly distinguishes itself from people-related tools with 'Searches API metadata, not people.'
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?
It provides clear context: use when unified capabilities cannot meet the need. It does not name specific alternatives, but the sibling list and the clarification about not searching people imply when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.