search_schemas

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains that the tool searches by keyword in names and descriptions, but does not disclose limitations such as pagination, result counts, or search behavior (e.g., exact vs. fuzzy matching).

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 two sentences: first states purpose, second provides usage guidance with examples. No unnecessary words, efficiently communicates essential information.

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 search tool with one parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description covers purpose and usage adequately. Could mention whether wildcards or partial matches are supported, but overall sufficient.

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 100% (query parameter described as 'Keyword to search for in schema names and descriptions'). The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond repeating 'keyword' and providing examples. Baseline 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 searches for Magento 2 data schemas by keyword, distinguishing it from siblings like get_schema (retrieves a specific schema) and search_endpoints (searches endpoints). Examples of keywords are provided, enhancing clarity.

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 advises using the tool to find data structure definitions by name or description, implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like get_schema for exact schema retrieval.

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