Search Agents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds that agents are 'tracked' and searchable by name/repo/description, which is useful context. No contradictions. However, it does not disclose additional behaviors like pagination or result format beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Description is a single, clear sentence. It is concise and front-loaded with the key action. Could benefit from slight expansion to cover parameters, but overall efficient.

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?

With 3 parameters and an output schema, the description should provide enough context for correct invocation. It outlines the search fields but omits specifics on category filtering and limit. Since output schema exists, return values are documented elsewhere, but the description is incomplete for behavioral guidance.

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 description must compensate. It mentions search by 'name, repo, or description', which hints at the query parameter, but does not explain the category or limit parameters. It lacks explicit mapping of parameters to their roles or allowable values.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches 'tracked AI agents and frameworks' by name, repo, or description. The verb 'search' and resource are specific. Sibling tools (check_agent_trust, verify_mcp_server) are for different purposes, so this tool is well-distinguished.

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?

Description implies usage for searching agents, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. The sibling tools are not referenced. Still, the search purpose is clear and contextually distinct from the siblings.

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