Catalog Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It adds 'Free and read-only,' which is helpful but lacks details on rate limits, pagination, or response characteristics. The output schema exists but doesn't compensate for the lack of behavioral context in the description itself.

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 extremely concise—one sentence with no wasted words. For a simple tool with one parameter, this is appropriately sized.

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 the tool's simplicity (one param, output schema exists), the description covers the basics but remains vague about query syntax and result handling. It is minimally viable but not fully complete.

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 100% for the single parameter 'query,' so the schema already provides meaning. The description does not add any additional semantics beyond what the schema states.

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 tool's purpose is clearly stated: 'Search Blocksize docs/catalog entries.' The verb 'search' and the resource 'Blocksize docs/catalog entries' are specific, though 'catalog entries' is slightly vague. It distinguishes from the sibling 'search_pairs' by context, but not 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?

The description provides only 'Free and read-only,' which implies safe usage but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'fetch' or 'search_pairs.' No alternatives or exclusions are given.

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