searchArtifacts

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'search by keyword' but doesn't mention side effects (likely none), authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens on failure. The absence of any behavioral context leaves significant gaps 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?

The description is a single, clear sentence at 6 words, which is very concise and front-loaded. It sacrifices no clarity for brevity, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming 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 tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is somewhat underpowered. It covers the basic purpose but lacks explanation of return format, default behavior for 'fetchRealLatest', or error handling, making it minimally complete 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 description coverage is 100%, so the description doesn't need to add much. It does not elaborate on parameters beyond the schema, but the schema's descriptions ('Max results', 'Search query', 'Fetch real-time latest version') are adequate. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds no extra semantic value.

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 for Maven artifacts by keyword, using the verb 'search' and resource 'Maven artifacts'. While it doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'getLatestVersion' or 'getDependencies', it implies a general search capability, which is distinct enough to avoid confusion.

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 siblings. For example, it does not explain that 'searchArtifacts' is for finding artifacts by keyword while 'getLatestVersion' retrieves the latest version of a specific artifact. The agent is left to infer usage from names alone.

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