search_endpoints

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does well by disclosing cost ('Free'), return contents ('paths, descriptions and per-call prices'), and the searchable dimensions. It does not explicitly mention read-only behavior or rate limits, though 'search' strongly implies a safe read operation.

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?

One information-dense sentence with the most important signal ('START HERE. Free.') front-loaded. The list of services is useful, not padding, and the next-step routing earns its place.

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 two-parameter search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description gives enough context: what it searches, what it returns, cost, and the recommended follow-up calls. Nothing essential for invoking it correctly is missing.

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 already covers both parameters thoroughly with examples, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying they can be used together ('by keyword and/or service') and by naming the service categories, which helps the agent understand what values are meaningful.

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 action ('Search fetcher.sh's web-data endpoints'), names the resource domain, lists concrete services, and says what it returns. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly being the starting point before describe_endpoint and fetch_data.

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?

It opens with 'START HERE', says it is free, and gives an explicit workflow: search first, then call describe_endpoint, then fetch_data. This directly tells the agent when to use this tool and how it relates to the obvious sibling alternatives.

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