censys_search_hosts

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

No annotations are provided, but the description does disclose the credential requirement and the action is clearly a search, implying read-only behavior. It does not explicitly state whether the operation is non-mutating, mention rate limits, or describe pagination behavior beyond the cursor parameter, so some behavioral transparency is left implicit.

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 and usage guidelines are brief, focused, and free of redundant or filler content. Every sentence adds value, and the structure clearly separates purpose, usage, and credential requirements.

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?

The description is complete for a search tool: it names the endpoint, specifies the query language, describes all input parameters, and covers authentication. The presence of an output schema means response details are not required in the description, and the provided context is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

All parameters are described with useful detail: query includes a syntax example, cursor explains base64 pagination, per_page has min/max constraints, and virtual_hosts lists allowed values. The schema coverage is complete and the descriptions add meaningful context beyond simple type declarations.

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 explicitly states the action ('Search'), the target resource ('internet-connected hosts'), and the scope ('global Censys IPv4/IPv6 database'). It also includes a clear use case ('discovery of exposed external infrastructure, open ports, and services'), which distinguishes it from the sibling single-host tool.

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 Usage Guidelines provide concrete guidance: best for discovery tasks, uses Censys Search v2 syntax on the specific endpoint, and requires credentials. However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with the sibling 'censys_get_host' or state when to prefer one over the other.

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