Search Blizzard's Lua mixins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains what mixins are and that searching a method name yields the defining mixin, adding useful context. However, it doesn't disclose return format, pagination, or other side effects, leaving some behavioral aspects implicit.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no filler or redundant phrasing. Every sentence adds value.

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 focused search tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core functionality, domain context, and use cases. It doesn't explicitly mention result format or parameter edge cases, but the provided information is sufficient for a straightforward read-only search.

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 67% (query and flavor have descriptions, limit does not). The description adds a small behavioral nuance about query ('Searching a method name finds the mixin that defines it') but doesn't elaborate on limit or flavor beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific action ('Search') and a clear resource ('the mixin tables Blizzard's UI uses'), and further distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning 'XML mixin attribute or CreateFromMixins' and 'method name finds the mixin that defines it'.

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?

It provides explicit use cases: 'reuse Blizzard's behaviour' and 'understand what a template's methods do.' It doesn't name alternatives but clearly implies this tool is for mixin-specific searches, making it distinct from API or template searches.

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