Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• search_developer_resourcesC
  2.3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'search specifically', implying read-only behavior, but does not confirm safety (e.g., no mutations, no side effects). No additional traits are revealed.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness2/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is only one sentence, which is too brief to be effective. While short, it omits critical details (parameter semantics, usage boundaries), making it under-specified rather than concise.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the low schema coverage, lack of output schema, and missing annotations, the description is completely inadequate to guide correct invocation. It fails to explain parameters or distinguish from siblings, leaving the agent with minimal useful context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no information about the three parameters (query, language, framework). The agent must rely solely on parameter names, which are ambiguous (e.g., 'language' could mean programming language or human language).

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool searches for developer resources and documentation, using a specific verb and domain. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'search_documentation', which likely overlaps in purpose.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or references to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

• search_documentationC
  2.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, result format, or whether it targets only specific sources.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure or front-loading of key information. It is adequately sized but could be more informative.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the 2 parameters and sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the 'technology' parameter, does not differentiate from search_developer_resources, and lacks output schema or behavioral details.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0% and the description adds no meaning to the parameters 'query' or 'technology'. It fails to clarify what 'technology' is or how to use it.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it searches for official documentation and API references, which is a specific verb-resource combination. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling search_developer_resources, which may have a similar purpose.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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

• search_with_groundingC
  2.6/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only says 'using Gemini grounding', which is vague about what sources are searched, how results are returned, or any side effects. The lack of detail understates 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.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is very short (one sentence) and front-loaded with the verb, which is good. However, it is too terse and omits essential details, so it is not appropriately sized for the complexity.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool has 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, parameter usage, or any nuances, making it inadequate for proper invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description provides no information about any of the three parameters (query, context, focus). The agent has no semantic understanding beyond the parameter names and types, which is insufficient.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'search' and the resource 'current information', and differentiates from siblings like 'search_documentation' by mentioning 'Gemini grounding'. This makes the purpose specific and distinct.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  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 siblings such as 'search_developer_resources' or 'search_reddit'. The description does not provide context for choosing this over alternatives, leaving the agent without decision support.

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

• search_redditB
  3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether results include posts, comments, or metadata, nor any limitations on rate or scope.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence, concise and front-loaded with the key action, but it is too brief to cover important details, making it borderline under-specified rather than efficiently complete.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description lacks information on search behavior, result format, and optional parameter usage, leaving significant gaps in context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description adds no meaning beyond the schema for the two parameters (query and subreddit). With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain how to use these parameters effectively.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states it searches Reddit discussions and community insights, clearly identifying the source and type of content, which distinguishes it from sibling tools targeting developer resources or documentation.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies use for Reddit-related searches but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like search_developer_resources or search_documentation.

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