Locate AI configuration blueprints and prompt hierarchies in the public marketplace by query, category, tags, or type to find relevant setups quickly.
Search the public LynxPrompt blueprint marketplace
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | No | Comma-separated tags to filter by (optional) | |
| type | No | Filter by type, e.g. AGENTS_MD, CLAUDE_MD (optional) | |
| query | Yes | Search query string | |
| category | No | Filter by category (optional) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description claims a search operation, but annotations include destructiveHint: true, contradicting the non-destructive nature of a search. The description fails to explain any behavioral traits, and the contradiction severely undermines transparency.
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 conveys the core purpose with no unnecessary words or 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?
Given the tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more context about the return format, pagination, or behavior. The minimal description leaves agents uninformed about results.
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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters, so the schema already documents their meanings. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what is in the schema.
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 'Search the public LynxPrompt blueprint marketplace' clearly states the verb 'search' and the specific resource 'public LynxPrompt blueprint marketplace'. It effectively distinguishes this tool from its siblings which are CRUD operations.
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The description simply states its function without any context about prerequisites, limitations, or comparisons to sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.