Search Tokens

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits like whether results are paginated, ordered, or limited. The read-only nature is implied by the word 'search' but not explicitly stated.

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?

Single sentence containing only essential information. No extraneous words or repetition.

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?

Given no output schema or annotations, the description is minimal. It lacks details on return format, result limits, or pagination. For a search tool, this leaves ambiguity about what the agent should expect.

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% with descriptions for both parameters (e.g., 'category' lists possible values, 'namePattern' notes case-insensitivity). The tool description merely paraphrases the schema fields without adding new nuance, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states 'Search for design tokens by category or name pattern', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_token' (single token) and 'get_component_tokens' (tokens by component).

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 via the verb 'search', but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'get_token' or 'get_component_tokens'. No exclusions or context provided.

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