apt_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it searches packages and returns a result list, but it does not disclose additional behavior such as remote-host execution implications or output format details beyond the basic return type.

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 main purpose is front-loaded in a single clear sentence, followed by a compact Args/Returns section. It is concise and readable, though the Args/Returns block is somewhat redundant with the structured schema.

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 read-only search tool, the description plus annotations and schema are largely sufficient: it conveys the search behavior, parameters, and return type. Minor gaps remain about the exact contents or formatting of the result list, but they do not seriously impede correct usage.

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 description merely lists the parameter names query, host, and response_format without explaining them. However, the nested schema definitions provide meaningful descriptions for each parameter, so the schema already covers parameter semantics; the description adds little value on top.

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 clearly states the tool performs a package search by name/description based on 'apt-cache search', giving a specific verb and resource. It is easy to tell this is a read-only search tool, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like apt_show or apt_list_upgradable.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as apt_show, apt_install, or apt_list_upgradable. The description implies a search use case but does not state exclusions or recommend sibling tools.

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