Search NightMarquee prompts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds little behavioral context beyond what annotations and the output schema already provide, but it does not contradict them.

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 dense sentence with an action, resource, and downstream integration. The inline list of categories is somewhat redundant with the schema enum, but it supports quick at-a-glance understanding without wasting words.

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 an optional-parameter, read-only search tool with a fully documented schema and an output schema present, the description provides enough context to select and invoke it correctly. It could clarify what happens on an empty search, but the schema and output schema mitigate that 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 100%, with descriptions for query, category, tier, and limit including enums, defaults, and auth implications. The description merely echoes the parameter vocabulary without adding new semantic detail, so the schema carries the load.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('Search the NightMarquee catalog of website and mobile app build prompts') and names the search dimensions (keyword, category, tier). It also differentiates itself from the sibling retrieval tool by stating that results are slugs, taglines, and demo links to feed into nightmarquee_get_prompt.

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 workflow is clear: search first, then pass a matching slug to nightmarquee_get_prompt. This implicitly tells the agent when to select this tool versus the retrieval sibling, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or spell out exclusions.

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