ms_search_methods

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: search works in Russian and English, returns a JSON list, and results are ordered best first. No contradiction with annotations.

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 and efficient: one clear purpose sentence, two parameter lines, and a return-type line. Every sentence adds value and the action is front-loaded.

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 search tool with a simple parameter set and an output schema, the description fully covers invocation requirements: search terms, result limit, supported languages, return format, and ordering. Nothing needed to call the tool correctly is 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?

The input schema has 0% property description coverage, so the description carries full responsibility for explaining parameters. It explains 'query' with concrete examples and 'limit' with an explicit range (1-50), providing meaning well beyond the bare schema fields.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'Search the endpoint catalog by keyword.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from siblings like ms_describe_method or ms_call_method, which target individual endpoints rather than discovering them.

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 implicitly defines when to use the tool: when you need to find endpoints by keyword. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context among siblings makes the appropriate use clear.

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