search_varptypes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions searching a file but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination behavior (implied by parameters), rate limits, authentication needs, error conditions, or what the search returns (structure/format). The description is minimal beyond the basic operation.

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?

Single sentence, zero waste, front-loaded with the core action. Every word earns its place by specifying the file, target, and purpose without redundancy.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a search operation with pagination parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the search returns, how results are structured, or important behavioral context like pagination details, making it inadequate for a tool with 3 parameters and no structured output documentation.

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 parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying 'query' searches within the file content, which is already clear from the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Search') and target resource ('varptypes.txt file for player variables'), specifying what varps store ('player state and progress'). It distinguishes from generic file tools but doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar search_*type tools like search_varbittypes.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_data_file or other search_*type tools. The description implies it's for searching varps specifically, but doesn't mention prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative use cases with siblings.

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