search_modules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the bar is low. The description adds the behavioral constraint that max_results is capped at 100, which is valuable context beyond annotations.

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 extremely concise, with every sentence providing essential information. It is front-loaded with the purpose and then details parameters efficiently.

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 2 parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameter semantics, and behavioral constraints (capped results). No gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the query parameter with examples ('glycolysis', 'TCA cycle') and notes the cap on max_results, adding meaning beyond the schema's titles and default 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 'Search KEGG modules by keyword,' providing a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling search tools like search_pathways and search_compounds by specifying 'modules' as the target.

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?

Usage is implied: use for keyword searches on KEGG modules. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or suggestions for alternative tools, such as search_pathways for pathways or get_module_info for detailed info on a specific module.

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