mcp_index_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention performance, side effects, authentication, or rate limits. The description only states the basic action, leaving agents uninformed about important operational details.

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 sentence of six words, highly concise with no redundancy. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should explain what the search returns (e.g., list of tool names, metadata, relevance scores). It fails to do so. Also, no mention of pagination or sorting. The description addresses only the basic function, leaving gaps 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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides adequate information.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches for MCP tools by description or capability. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like mcp_index_get_tool, which retrieves a specific tool, or mcp_index_scan. The purpose is specific but could be more distinctive.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention that this is for free-form searching, while mcp_index_get_tool is for known tool names. Agents have no context for choosing correctly.

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