Search saved queries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond them: it doesn't say what a search matches against (tags, text, author), whether results are paginated, or how the community directory behaves.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste, but its brevity comes from under-specification rather than tight editing; it leaves obvious questions unanswered.

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 no output schema, two undocumented parameters, and three near-identical query-related siblings, the description should explain result shape and how it differs from shodan_query_list. It does neither, so an agent cannot confidently select or invoke it.

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?

Two parameters with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must carry the load and doesn't. It never explains whether 'query' is a free-text search term, a tag, or an exact name match, nor what 'page' paginates.

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 verb (Search) and a resource (community query directory), which is more than a tautology. But it doesn't distinguish this from the sibling shodan_query_list, so an agent can't tell which one retrieves the directory versus which one searches within it. Purpose is only vaguely delimited.

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?

No guidance on when to use this instead of shodan_query_list or shodan_query_tags, both of which appear to operate on the same query directory. The description provides no conditions, exclusions, or alternatives.

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