search_tools

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It states what the tool returns (matching tools with names, descriptions, required parameters) but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as rate limits, pagination, or behavior on no matches. This is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 concise, consisting of three sentences. It is well-structured with a heading, usage guidance, and a parameter explanation. Every sentence adds value 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 the simplicity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the purpose, when to use it, what it returns, and the single parameter. No additional information is necessary for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by describing the query parameter as a 'Search term' and providing examples ('blur', 'resize', etc.). This clarifies the expected input beyond the schema's type-only definition.

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 that the tool searches registered MCP tools by keyword. It specifies the action (search), the resource (registered MCP tools), and the scope (by keyword). This distinguishes it from sibling tools, which are the actual tools to be searched.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when you need to find the right tool for a task without reading all 91 tool descriptions.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the guidance is sufficient for a search tool.

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