mdns_browse_services

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it returns a list of discovered services and provides an example output, but does not elaborate on network dependencies or variability beyond the openWorldHint.

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 well-organized with sections (intro, Args, Returns, Example), but the first two sentences are redundant, and the Args section largely duplicates the schema, making it slightly longer than necessary.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, parameters, return value (with example), and relationship to a sibling tool. It does not discuss error conditions or network prerequisites, but for a browse tool this is adequate.

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 contains detailed descriptions for all parameters (service_type, timeout, response_format), so the description's 'Args' section adds minimal new information beyond restating 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 uses a specific verb ('browse') and resource ('services of a specific type') and differentiates from sibling tools by mentioning that the results can be used with mdns_get_service_info for details, distinguishing it from related tools like mdns_list_service_types.

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 clearly states when to use the tool (to browse for services of a given type) and implies that mdns_get_service_info is for detailed info, but does not explicitly exclude other use cases or provide guidance on 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.