Tez Search Tzip

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'Search TZIP standards' without mentioning whether the operation is read-only, what the return format is, or any potential side effects or limitations. This lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's behavior.

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, succinct sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any redundant words or fluff. It is well-structured and immediately understandable, exemplifying excellent 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?

The description provides enough for a basic understanding but omits critical context such as how this tool differs from the general 'tez_search' or what the output schema looks like. Although the output schema exists separately, the description does not mention the return type or any usage nuances, leaving some gaps for an agent deciding whether to use this 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?

The schema description covers 100% of parameters, each with a brief explanation (e.g., 'Search query', 'Maximum results (1-50, default 5)'). The tool description adds no additional parameter detail, so it relies fully on the schema. Since coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose with the verb 'Search' and the resource 'TZIP standards', and it even provides examples (token standards, metadata specs, wallet standards) that clarify the scope. The name 'tez_search_tzip' reinforces the specific target, making the intent unmistakable.

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 implies the tool is for TZIP-specific searches, but it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like 'tez_search' or 'tez_search_protocol'. There is no direct guidance on when to choose this over alternatives, leaving the decision to inference from the name and context.

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