search_endpoints

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

The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond what the schema and annotations provide. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, but it only states the search function without detailing behavior like case sensitivity, partial matching, or response structure. A score of 3 is appropriate as the description adds minimal behavioral insight beyond the purpose.

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 and front-loaded: two sentences that directly convey purpose and usage. No extraneous 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?

For a simple search tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It lacks information about output format, but since no output schema exists, the description could be improved by hinting at the results. However, given the tool's simplicity, a score of 4 is justified.

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 already provides a description for the query parameter with examples. The description's mention of keywords adds no new semantic value beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 'Search' and identifies the resource 'VedIntel™ AstroAPI endpoints by keyword'. It clearly states the tool's purpose and adds examples of search terms, making it easy for an agent to understand its function.

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 provides a clear context for when to use the tool: 'when you know what you want' and includes examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, which are present among siblings (e.g., list_endpoints for browsing all endpoints).

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