pdb_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the tool's rationale (avoiding thousands of exported tools) and implicitly that it is a read-only discovery operation. However, it never says how matching works (substring, prefix, regex, case sensitivity) or how results are bounded. Return format is covered by the output schema, which partially offsets the gap.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with no filler; the purpose and its justification are front-loaded. It is efficient, though brevity here comes at the cost of operational detail.

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 two-parameter search tool with an output schema, the essential missing piece is the matching semantics of 'query' and the meaning of 'limit' – neither is addressed. With the output schema covering return values, the description is adequate but leaves a real gap for correct invocation.

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 0% and neither parameter is explained. The description says nothing about what 'query' matches against or how 'limit' truncates results, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'search GIMP PDB procedure names', and clarifies the mechanism ('without exporting thousands of procedures as MCP tools'). It distinguishes itself from sibling pdb_describe implicitly by being about discovery/search rather than describing a single procedure, though it never names that sibling.

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?

'Expert discovery' implies an audience but gives no explicit when-to-use condition, no prerequisites, and does not name any alternative such as pdb_describe or filter_list. An agent must infer the routing decision entirely.

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