search_natives

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implies read-only behavior ('search'), but does not explicitly confirm safety, idempotency, or performance implications. It lacks details on return behavior for empty queries or edge cases.

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?

Two concise sentences for purpose, then a clean bullet-style parameter explanation. Front-loaded with key info, no wasted words.

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 3 params and existing output schema, the description covers usage and parameter meaning well. It could mention expected output (e.g., list of native names) or edge cases, but overall sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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%, and description compensates by explaining query as substring across names and doc comments with examples, namespace as optional filter with valid examples, and limit as max results with default. Adds meaningful context beyond schema types.

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 it searches a ~6700-native library to discover capabilities. It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('library'), and distinguishes itself from siblings like call_native or native_info by focusing on discovery.

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 example query substrings and namespace filters, guiding when to use. However, it doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use. The context from siblings implies differentiation, but not explicitly stated.

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