package-search

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses search sources (registry + installed), result prioritization order, and online mode behavior regarding caching. This provides good insight into the tool's behavior.

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 at 4 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose followed by usage and details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or 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 the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters with defaults, search behavior), the description covers key aspects: search scope, result prioritization, and online/offline behavior. However, it does not describe return format or error cases, but output schema absence means agent must infer. Still sufficient for typical use.

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% (all 3 parameters documented), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing examples for 'query', explaining default values for 'maxResults' and 'offlineMode', and clarifying what offline mode does, enhancing agent understanding beyond the schema.

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 tool searches for packages in Unity Package Manager registry and installed packages, using specific verbs and resources. It differentiates from siblings like package-add, package-list, and package-remove by specifying this is for finding packages before installing.

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 description explicitly says 'Use this to find packages by name before installing them,' which guides when to use. It explains search scope and prioritization but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, though the context with siblings implies usage boundaries.

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