sbis_search_methods

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context (bilingual RU/EN search, best-first ranking) but says nothing about auth requirements, result caps, or empty-result behavior.

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?

Front-loads the core action in the first sentence and keeps the Args block tight. Slight redundancy in listing both the parameter names and their schema titles, but no wasted prose.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be detailed, and annotations cover safety, so the description is nearly complete for a two-param discovery tool. Only auth/precondition context is absent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: 'query' is explained as free text with bilingual examples, and 'limit' is given a 1-50 range that the schema lacks. It omits the default (15) present in the schema, a minor gap.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: searching the endpoint catalog by keyword. It contrasts clearly with the call/describe siblings by nature of being a discovery tool, but it never names any sibling to route the agent explicitly.

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?

Implies its usage (keyword lookup of endpoints) but gives no explicit when-to-use, no mention that it precedes sbis_describe_method or sbis_call_method, and no exclusions. Usage is inferred rather than guided.

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