search_tools

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys that the operation is read-oriented ('Find') and defines the matching behavior as name or summary matching, but it omits details such as case sensitivity, partial matching, ordering, or the exact scope of 'routed tools'.

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, tightly worded sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded. It contains no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary detail, making every word earn 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?

For a one-parameter, read-only search tool with an output schema present, the description is largely complete for invoking the tool correctly. It would be slightly stronger if it clarified the meaning of 'routed tools' or explicitly routed users to this tool versus category-based browsing.

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 provides no description for the 'query' parameter and schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining that the keyword is matched against 'name or summary'. This gives the parameter clear meaning beyond the schema's bare existence.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find') and a specific resource ('routed tools'), and it states the exact matching criterion ('name or summary matches a keyword'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tool_categories, get_category_tools, and get_tool_schema, which serve different purposes such as browsing categories or retrieving schemas.

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 implies the tool should be used when an agent has a keyword and needs to locate relevant routed tools. However, it does not explicitly contrast this with alternatives like list_tool_categories or get_category_tools, nor does it state when not to use it.

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