roadmap_search

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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the scope enumeration and keyword search intent, but does not detail return format, pagination, or result limits. This is acceptable given the strong annotation coverage, but not exceptional.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It includes the scope list inline, avoiding unnecessary verbiage. Every word contributes to understanding.

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 simple search operation, rich annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the purpose and scope options. It could mention return behavior, but the lack of output schema and the straightforward nature of search make this a minor gap.

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 the description must compensate. It explains that 'query' is the keyword and 'scope' limits to one of the listed categories, providing essential meaning not inferable from the bare schema. It doesn't discuss constraints like maxLength or default, but the core semantics are covered.

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 roadmap.sh slugs by keyword, with a specific verb and resource. It also enumerates the scope options, distinguishing it from sibling tools that retrieve or list specific resources (e.g., roadmap_get, roadmap_list).

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 clear context by indicating the tool is for keyword-based search within defined scopes. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the scope options and sibling tool names imply it should be used when you need to find a slug by keyword rather than using a direct getter or list operation.

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