wb_search_methods

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: keyword search works in Russian and English, results are returned as a JSON list, and are ordered best first. This is meaningful additional information.

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 compact, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and clearly separates arguments from return behavior. Every sentence contributes either purpose, parameter semantics, or result expectations without redundancy.

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 two-parameter search tool with an output schema already present, the description is complete: it covers what the tool does, what inputs look like, the return type, ordering, and multilingual behavior. No essential calling details are 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for parameter understanding. It explains 'query' as free text with concrete examples and 'limit' as max results with a 1-50 range)Skip the schema only provides type and default. This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 verb and resource: 'Search the endpoint catalog by keyword.' This clearly differentiates the tool from sibling catalog-related tools like wb_list_sections, wb_describe_method, and wb_map.

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 tool's usage context is clear: use it when you need to find endpoints by keyword. The description even shows example queries like 'остатки' and 'stocks'. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the search-specific framing provides sufficient context without being misleading.

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