flo_search

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

With no annotations, the description provides minimal behavioral details. It mentions 'interface-agent' but does not state whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication (though authToken param suggests it), or any side effects.

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, focused sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's core action. However, it could include brief parameter context without becoming overly verbose.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and incomplete parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return format ('plugin menu items') or any dependencies on the interface-agent.

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 50% (authToken has description, query does not). The description adds no additional meaning to parameters, failing to explain what the 'query' expects or how 'authToken' is used.

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 'Run /flo:search against interface-agent and return plugin menu items' clearly states the action (run a search command) and the result (plugin menu items), distinguishing it from sibling tools like flo_query which likely handle generic queries.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., flo_query, flo_skill_routing). The description lacks context about suitability or exclusions.

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