Search Bruno endpoints

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: field-aware ranking, return of score and matchedFields, and default exclusion of docs-only matches. This goes beyond the schema, though it omits details like auth requirements or rate limits, which are less critical 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?

The description consists of two concise sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and key behaviors without extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the core verb and resource.

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 adequately specifies return values (score, matchedFields) and a key filter (docs-only exclusion). However, it does not explain the ranking algorithm or other search mode behaviors, though the schema's enums cover search_mode. Overall sufficient for typical use.

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%, and the description does not elaborate on any parameters. While the schema defines types and enums, the description adds no additional meaning to help the agent understand parameter usage, default behaviors, or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 searches endpoints with field-aware ranking, and specifies that it returns score and matchedFields and excludes docs-only matches by default. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_endpoints which likely return all endpoints without ranking.

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?

The description implies usage for searching endpoints with ranking and filtering, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_endpoints, get_endpoint, or search modes. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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