Search the Agent402 tool catalog

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior; the description adds useful post-conditions: 'Returns matching tools + workflow templates; call them with catalog.call.' It also notes cost-relevant behavior ('pay-per-call', some free via proof-of-work) that annotations do not cover. No contradictions.

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 core is front-loaded and the main guidance is useful, but the description spends a sentence on an OpenAI-compatible LLM gateway and pricing details via catalog.call, which is irrelevant to invoking catalog.search. The parenthetical 'exact count 578' is also unnecessary.

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 two-parameter search tool with output schema and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, return type, and follow-up invocation. No essential information for correct selection or invocation is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents query and limit. The description adds 'keyword search' and 'long-tail slugs' as query context, but does not materially extend parameter meaning beyond the schema; a 3 is the appropriate baseline.

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 explicitly identifies the tool as 'keyword search over Agent402's 500+ pay-per-call tools' and distinguishes it from siblings: 'Start with listed flagships... use this for long-tail slugs' and 'Counterpart catalog.find resolves a task to ONE ready-to-run pick.' An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and how it differs from catalog.find.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: use the flagships for common task categories, use catalog.search 'for long-tail slugs,' and use catalog.find when a single ready-to-run pick is needed. It also tells the agent that matched tools are invoked via catalog.call, giving a clear execution path.

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