search_snippets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds valuable context that snippets are executed, self-checking notebooks with pinned versions, and that the corpus only contains passing tests. This informs the agent about data quality, but does not cover other behavioral aspects such as pagination, error handling, or access requirements.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and every word adds value. It avoids fluff and effectively communicates the core functionality and key corpus characteristics in a compact form.

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 existence of an output schema, descriptions of return values are unnecessary. The description covers the essential purpose and a distinguishing data-quality trait. However, incomplete parameter semantics and lack of usage exclusions leave minor gaps for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only indirectly references 'query' ('matching a query') and provides no explanation for the `app_id` parameter or query syntax. The description adds minimal value over the bare schema titles, failing to clarify parameter constraints or usage.

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 uses the specific verb 'Find' with a clear resource: 'tested, version-pinned workflow snippets matching a query.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_community and search_docs by emphasizing 'workflow snippets' and the tested/pinned nature, making the tool's purpose immediately clear.

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 reliable, pre-tested snippets ('only entries whose test passed are in the corpus'), which suggests a niche compared to generic search tools. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like search_docs or search_community, nor does it mention exclusions or alternatives.

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