l402_search

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden, and 'Search' implies a read-only operation without stating it outright. It does disclose a meaningful behavioral difference between sources (result richness vs breadth of coverage), which helps an agent predict output quality, but says nothing about rate limits, auth, pagination, or result shape.

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?

Two tight sentences, no waste, with the core action front-loaded and the source tradeoff immediately after. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Four optional parameters and no output schema, so the description arguably should hint at what a search returns; it only does so obliquely through 'rich schema.' It is adequate to call the tool correctly but leaves an agent guessing about result shape and volume.

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 coverage is 100%, so the enum values, defaults, and keyword/category meanings are already documented. The description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema by characterizing each source ('curated, rich schema' vs 'broader coverage, 50+ services'), though it does not clarify 'status' or 'category' beyond the schema text.

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+resource ('Search L402 service directories') and the goal ('find paid APIs accessible with Lightning payments'), which is much clearer than a bare name restatement. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling tool l402_discover, which sounds like the same discovery capability.

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 gives a usable default/alternative framing for the source parameter ('curated, rich schema' vs 'broader coverage, 50+ services'), which is actionable. But it offers no guidance on when to call this at all versus l402_discover or l402_store, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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