vibemk_search_rulesets

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

The description implies a read-only search operation but does not explicitly state side effects or lack thereof. With no annotations to rely on, the full burden is on the description, which fails to disclose whether this modifies state or is safe to call repeatedly.

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 extremely concise, using one short sentence with no unnecessary words. It gets straight to the point and avoids fluff, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not indicate what the tool returns (e.g., list of matching rulesets, count, or details). For a search tool, the return format is essential context that is missing, making the description incomplete for an agent needing to interpret results.

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 schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all five parameters (name, used, folder, fulltext, deprecated). The description adds minimal value beyond a generic mention of 'text, folder, name', which omits 'used' and 'deprecated'. It does not introduce new meaning, so it stays at the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 rulesets with filters, using the verb 'search' and object 'rulesets'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_rulesets (list all) and get_ruleset (get specific) via the 'search' and 'find' terminology, though it does not explicitly name the alternatives.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling ruleset tools (e.g., get_rulesets, show_ruleset, list_rulesets). The description does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or when to prefer alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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