search_devto_posts

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses that query searches multiple fields, tag filters, and top changes behavior to return top articles. Missing details on authentication or rate limits, but acceptable for a search tool.

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?

Well-structured with Args and Returns sections, but slightly verbose. Could be more concise while retaining clarity.

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?

Covers all 5 parameters with clear explanations and mentions return type. Output schema is indicated. No major gaps for a search tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, but description explains each parameter's purpose (query searches title/body/tags, tag optional filter, per_page max 30, page pagination, top switches mode). Adds significant meaning beyond property names.

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?

Clearly states 'Search dev.to articles' with a list of arguments and return type. Distinguishes from sibling tools like get_devto_article but does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., search_by_tech).

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?

Implied usage through description of arguments, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives. No when-not or context for choosing over search_by_tech.

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