pypi_search

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

The description mentions it tries multiple name variants and returns specific fields (version, summary, links, metadata). Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden, but it does not detail any destructive behavior or auth requirements. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 concise with three sentences, each adding value: purpose, behavior, and guidance. No wasted 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?

Given no output schema and simple parameters, the description covers the essential behavior and return types. However, it does not mention pagination or sorting, which could be needed for a search tool.

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 already has descriptions for both parameters (query and per_page). The description adds context about name variant handling and returned data, but given 100% schema coverage, this baseline is appropriate.

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 it looks up Python packages on PyPI by name, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like npm_search or github_search by being about PyPI packages.

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?

It advises using 'exact or approximate package name' for best results, which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or provide alternatives among siblings.

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