Find mods by name

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

Annotations already establish readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, but the description adds non-obvious behavior: an automatic fallback retry against mod descriptions when the name search returns nothing, and the fact it is backed by the v2 search index. It does not cover pagination/rate-limit behavior, which keeps it just under a 5.

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?

Four sentences, each earning its place, with the primary directive ('START HERE') front-loaded and the fallback and follow-up guidance ordered by relevance. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by listing the resolved fields. Combined with the auto-retry note and the sibling for deeper follow-up, an agent has everything needed to call it 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 coverage is 100% (14 params fully described), so the baseline is 3. The description earns extra credit by explaining that match=name silently retries against descriptions, which adds behavioral meaning to the `match` parameter beyond the schema's own text.

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+resource ('resolves [a mod name] to a mod_id') and enumerates the return payload (version, author, downloads, endorsements, last update, page URL). It clearly differentiates from nexus_mod_overview, nexus_get_mod, and nexus_graphql, so an agent can select it without opening other schemas.

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?

Opens with an explicit trigger ('START HERE when you only know a mod's name/keywords'), routes away from a sibling ('Follow up with nexus_mod_overview only if you need files or changelogs'), and forbids an alternative ('never write a raw GraphQL search yourself'). When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and the alternative are all named.

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