search_catalog

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds that the tool matches items by keyword, which is a useful behavioral nuance, but it omits details like search scope, case sensitivity, pagination, or result ordering.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and states the core purpose without any redundancy or filler.

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 simple search tool with read-only annotations and full schema coverage, the description is adequate. It clearly identifies the domain and action; however, it does not mention return format or default behaviors beyond what the limit parameter already states.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters ('Search keywords' for query and 'Max results (default: 10)' for limit). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 ('Search'), resource ('service catalog'), and result ('items matching a keyword'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_catalog_items or get_catalog_item. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 (keyword search over the service catalog) but provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives such as list_catalog_items, natural_language_search, or ai_search. No exclusions or alternative guidance are mentioned.

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