moltbook_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 states the search functionality but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, pagination, or what happens on errors. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with potential complexity in handling queries and limits.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a basic search tool, with no wasted content.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter coverage, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or behavioral context, making it inadequate for a search tool that likely returns complex results across multiple resource types.

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 50% (only 'q' has a description), and the description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema. It implies searching across resources but doesn't clarify how 'q' interacts with 'posts, moltys, and submolts' or the effect of 'limit'. With moderate schema coverage, the baseline is appropriate, but no extra value is added.

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 the action ('Search') and the resources ('posts, moltys, and submolts'), making the tool's purpose evident. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'moltbook_feed' or 'moltbook_submolts', which might also involve retrieving content, so it lacks sibling distinction.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'moltbook_feed' for feeds or 'moltbook_submolts' for specific content, there's no indication of context, exclusions, or prerequisites for choosing this search tool.

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