search_apis

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses that search spans three APIs, returns slim rows with specified fields, and points to another tool for details. Implies read-only search behavior. Missing rate limits or auth but acceptable for a search tool.

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?

Three sentences packed with essential info: main action, source routing, output format, and cross-reference. No redundant words, perfectly front-loaded.

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?

Describes inputs, behavior, output, and alternative tool. Missing details like pagination/ordering and query behavior, but output schema exists and overall coverage is good for a search tool with multiple sources.

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 0%, so description must add meaning. It explains the source parameter options and their routing. For limit and query, no extra information beyond schema defaults. Adds value for source but not comprehensive for all parameters.

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?

Clearly states it searches API endpoints across three named sources (fmp, tapetide, tavily). Distinguishes from sibling get_api_details by specifying it returns slim rows and delegates full schema retrieval. Verb+resource is specific and unambiguous.

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?

Explains source routing (tapetide=India, fmp=US/global, tavily=news) and instructs to pass source parameter to restrict. Advises to call get_api_details for full schema, providing an alternative. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear.

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