affinity_search_sdk_hints

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with a safe search operation. It adds minor context that hints are "shared" and intended for an "existing solution," but does not describe result format, matching behavior, or limits.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. Its brevity is appropriate structurally, even though it leaves important details unspecified.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description should clarify what is returned and how results are matched. It does not explain what an SDK hint contains, whether results are ranked, or what the prompt should contain, so it is not complete enough to guide reliable invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single undocumented "prompt" parameter. It only implies that the prompt relates to an existing solution; it does not explain whether the prompt should be natural language, an error message, code, or a feature description.

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 verb and resource: "Search shared Affinity SDK hints." It is distinguishable from sibling tools such as affinity_add_sdk_hint and affinity_list_sdk_documentation, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with affinity_read_sdk_documentation_topic.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this search tool versus reading SDK documentation topics or listing library scripts. The phrase "for an existing solution" hints at a use case but does not define when-not-to-use conditions or alternatives.

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