search_browser

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'search the browser' but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what the return value looks like, or any side effects. This lack of detail leaves significant uncertainty for an AI agent.

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 extremely concise and well-structured, with a one-line purpose statement followed by a compact parameter list. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 covers the core purpose and parameter semantics but omits any mention of return format, pagination, or whether the search is recursive. With no output schema and no annotations, this leaves the tool's behavior incomplete for the agent.

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 description fully explains both parameters, clarifying that 'query' searches item names and 'category' lists all accepted values. Since the schema descriptions are empty (0% coverage), this is essential and well-compensated.

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 the browser for items matching a query, using the specific verb 'search' and the resource 'browser'. This distinguishes it from sibling navigation tools like browse_path or get_browser_tree, which browse rather than search.

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 usage by specifying it searches item names and offering a category filter. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus browsing the browser tree or loading items, leaving the context to be inferred.

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