search_packages_from_npm

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action without indicating read-only nature, rate limits, or potential side effects. For a read operation, such omissions are significant gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no superfluous words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, e.g., by mentioning sorting or result fields.

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 tool has four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on search behavior, result structure, pagination, and any ordering or filtering nuances, leaving the agent with incomplete information.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain the semantics of quality or popularity scores. The default and bounds for limit are in the schema, but contextual meaning is missing.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'packages in npm registry'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like get_package_info_from_npm and get_readme_from_npm, which are for retrieving details or readme of specific packages, not for searching.

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 is provided. The context is implied by the tool name and sibling list, but the description itself does not clarify when searching is appropriate or when to use the other tools instead.

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