Search Aurora Repos

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context by noting the default Aurora 5 version and warning that descriptions are untrusted website data, which is important for safe downstream handling.

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?

Three sentences carry the essential information with no fluff. The description front-loads the primary purpose, then quickly covers defaults, filters, pagination, and the security-relevant warning.

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?

The description is largely complete for a read-only search tool, especially with annotations and an output schema present. It covers the main filtering dimensions, pagination, the version default, and an important data-safety caveat, though it would benefit from briefly stating what the query parameter matches.

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?

With schema description coverage at only 14%, the description compensates by explaining that category and author parameters function as filters and that page/page_size control pagination. It also clarifies the aurora_version default. Query and sort are not explicitly explained, though sort's enum and tool name provide some context.

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 identifies the tool as searching the public app catalog, which is a specific verb plus resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_app and list_my_apps by limiting scope to public catalog and mentioning Aurora version defaults.

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 implies this is for discovery in the public catalog, with filtering by category or author and pagination, but it does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives like list_author_apps or list_categories. Some exclusion guidance would improve selection accuracy, but the public scope does narrow the use case.

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