adb_registry_search

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

Without annotations, the description adds that it 'fetches the latest manifest from the configured registry URL,' indicating network access. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, has side effects, or requires specific permissions. The description partially compensates for missing annotations but lacks full transparency.

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, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence provides useful information. No redundant or unclear phrasing.

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 optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers its purpose and output. It could mention result limits or pagination, but the current level is sufficient for basic use.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'query' parameter. The description's note about filtering 'by name or description keyword' adds minimal value beyond the schema's description. Thus, 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 action 'search' and the resource 'community plugin registry', and lists the fields returned (name, description, version, author). It distinguishes from sibling tools like adb_registry_install (install) and adb_registry_installed (list installed) by focusing on search and manifest fetching.

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 context: it searches for available plugins before installation. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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