search_npk_codes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'search' implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects, nor does it mention authentication, rate limits, or other behavioral constraints. It is adequate but not detailed.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose. No superfluous information, and the parenthetical expansion of NPK is placed appropriately without disrupting readability.

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 the tool's simplicity (search by keyword or number), the description is largely complete. It does not specify the return format or result count, but this is not critical for a search tool and is likely inferable. Slight gap in not mentioning output specifics.

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 schema already provides descriptions for both parameters ('query' and 'lang'), covering their purpose and constraints. The tool description adds no further semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 NPK codes, with the expansion 'standardized positions catalog' adding helpful context. The verb 'search' and resource 'NPK codes' are specific, and it is distinguished from sibling search tools by the explicit code type.

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 mentions searching by keyword or number but provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling search tools (e.g., search_cpv_codes, search_bkp_codes). The intended use is implied by the tool name, but no explicit alternatives or conditions are given.

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