toolkit_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly lists what results include (name, slug, type, category, usage count), and the schema shows supported filtering (query, limit, tools_only, skills_only, category_id). This gives agents a clear behavioral model beyond just 'search'.

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, with the first sentence stating the core purpose and the second listing the returned fields. No filler or repetition—every sentence adds value.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description adequately explains what the result fields are (name, slug, type, category, usage count). The parameter schema is complete, and the complexity is low (no nested objects, enums). It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 100% coverage—all five parameters have descriptions. While the tool description does not add new parameter details beyond stating that it returns specific fields, the schema already provides sufficient meaning. 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 'Search across both tools and skills in a unified query,' specifying the verb (search), resource (tools and skills), and unique value (unified). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'search' (likely more generic) by emphasizing the dual scope.

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 for searching tools and skills but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like 'search', 'tool_list', or 'skill_list'. It lacks exclusion criteria or prerequisites, though the context is sufficient for basic understanding.

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