search_mcp_servers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only restates the search functionality without disclosing whether the operation is read-only, what the result format looks like, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a search tool that presumably returns data.

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 sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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?

For a simple search tool with optional params and no output schema, the description provides the minimum viable context. However, it lacks details about result format, default behavior, or how it differentiates from list_mcp_categories. The absence of annotations increases the need for such context, making this adequate but not complete.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond echoing 'keyword or category', which is already in the schema. The limit parameter is not mentioned in the description, so no additional value is provided.

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's function: 'Search the AllMCPs directory for Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers by keyword or category.' This uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('AllMCPs directory for MCP servers'), and distinguishes from siblings like list_mcp_categories by focusing on keyword/category search.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (searching by keyword or category), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. Sibling tools like list_mcp_categories are not referenced, so the guidance is clear but incomplete.

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