otp_search_best_practices

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details: no mention of read-only nature, auth requirements, rate limits, result structure, or pagination. Only states returns vetted patterns but no specifics on output format or ordering.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: action and scope in first, return value in second, usage context in third. Information is front-loaded and every sentence is 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?

For a simple search tool with good schema coverage, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. Could briefly mention results are from public library only (already done) or output format (not in schema but acceptable for a search tool).

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already provides clear descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool searches OTP's public best practices library across all publishing organizations, distinguishes itself from siblings like otp_get_patterns (which likely scopes to specific orgs), and explicitly mentions use case for operational pattern questions.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'for any "what's the best way to..." question.' Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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