skillNinja_webSearch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions searching GitHub for SKILL.md files, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, result format, pagination, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps for a search tool with no structured safety hints.

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 brief and front-loaded, stating the main purpose in the first sentence. The bilingual note adds minimal value but doesn't significantly detract. It could be more structured by separating key points, but overall it's efficient with little waste.

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 complexity of a search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what the search returns, how results are formatted, any limitations, or integration with other tools. This makes it inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 has 100% description coverage, with the 'query' parameter documented as 'Search query for GitHub'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as query syntax examples or search scope details. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 for Agent Skills on GitHub by finding SKILL.md files, providing a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Agent Skills on GitHub'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'skillNinja_list' or 'skillNinja_recommend' by focusing on GitHub search, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'skillNinja_search' which might be similar.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'skillNinja_search' or 'skillNinja_recommend' is provided. The description implies usage for finding skills on GitHub, but lacks context on prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons with sibling tools.

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