capabilities_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It gives examples of capabilities but says nothing about read-only behavior, filtering semantics, authentication, rate limits, or what the search returns.

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 two sentences and front-loads the purpose. The second sentence is somewhat cryptic but not bloated or wasteful.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description is incomplete for an unannotated five-parameter search tool. It leaves parameter semantics and invocation guidance undocumented, making correct use difficult.

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 tool has five parameters and 0% schema description coverage, yet the description never mentions query, category, pack, limit, or only_available. An agent cannot infer parameter meaning or usage from the description.

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?

States a specific verb (“Find”) and resource (“typed adapters and general capabilities”), and the examples clarify the domain. However, it does not distinguish this search tool from the sibling capabilities_describe tool.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as capabilities_describe. The examples describe kinds of capabilities but do not state when a search is appropriate or when it should not be used.

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