Search Algorithm Tag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'returns the tag slug' without disclosing behavior such as error handling (e.g., missing tag), case sensitivity, read-only nature, or any side effects. This is minimal transparency for a tool that will be invoked by an agent.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. No unnecessary words or redundant information; every word earns its place. It is appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool.

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 very simple tool with one string parameter and no output schema, the description states the basic operation and result. It does not specify return format or edge cases, but given the low complexity, it is largely complete. A small deduction for missing error/edge-case context.

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 covers the parameter fully: 'query' is described as 'tag name' (태그 이름) with 100% coverage. The description adds little beyond restating that the tag name is used, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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's function: using a tag name, it returns the tag slug. It uses a specific verb ('returns') and resource (tag), distinguishing it from sibling tools like search-contest or search-problem which target different entities.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention list-tag for listing tags or explain scenarios where search-tag is appropriate. The single sentence states the operation but lacks any contextual or exclusionary guidance.

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