search_components

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

Describes the search as fuzzy and specifies the searched fields. Without annotations, the description provides sufficient behavioral context, though details like case sensitivity or result ordering are omitted.

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?

Two sentences with front-loaded purpose and embedded examples. Efficient and clear, though could be slightly tighter.

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?

With two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the search scope, usage context, and examples. It adequately supports the human 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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 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 states 'Fuzzy search across component names, descriptions, and features' with clear verb and resource. It is distinct from siblings like list_components or get_components_by_scenario, as it focuses on approximate behavior-based lookup.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when you know what behavior you need but not which component provides it' and gives practical examples. This clearly differentiates from other component tools.

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