search_tools

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it returns results ranked by relevance, and mentions the catalog size (400+ tools). There is no contradiction with annotations, but it could further detail ranking or output format.

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 three focused sentences. The first states the core functionality, the second gives usage guidance, and the third adds context. Each sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (search with 2 parameters, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers purpose, usage, and parameters. It does not detail the output structure or ranking algorithm, but for a search discovery tool, that level of detail is acceptable and not critical for correct usage.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing example keywords (e.g., 'create incident') and stating the default limit (25), which is not in the schema. This helps the agent understand typical usage beyond what the schema 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 that the tool searches the full NowAIKit tool catalog by keyword to discover the right tool. It specifies the scope (400+ tools), the action (search by keyword), and the result (matching tool names + descriptions ranked by relevance). This distinguishes it from siblings which are direct operations on specific entities.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use this FIRST when you are unsure which tool to call.' It also provides context about the MCP_TOOL_DISCOVERY=lean scenario, giving clear, actionable usage direction.

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