Search SCAPS script commands

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description need not restate safety. It adds that the reference is tied to the installed SCAPS version and explains notation placeholders in command entries, though it does not describe matching behavior or result scope beyond that.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, and the notation legend is compact and relevant. The legend could be more tightly tied to 'returned command list', but there is 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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover safety, so return format and side effects need not be explained. Still, an agent lacks explicit routing guidance and any explanation of query matching or limit behavior; adequate but with visible gaps.

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 schema documents the required query parameter with examples, and the description adds domain vocabulary for numbered forms and <none> placeholders, which helps interpret/search command tokens. However, it never mentions the limit parameter or query matching semantics, so it only partially compensates for 50% schema description coverage.

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?

States a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('command list of the installed SCAPS version'), making it clearly a reference lookup rather than script execution or simulation. Sibling tools such as scaps_run_script and scaps_simulate are distinct from this.

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 implied use is to look up command syntax for the installed SCAPS version, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or alternatives. It does not say to consult this before scaps_run_script or clarify that it only searches rather than executes.

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