search_tools

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose a meaningful behavior (it avoids cold-starting backends), but it says nothing about return format, result ordering, pagination, or the precise meaning of 'declared' vs 'loaded'. Useful but incomplete.

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, compact sentence with the core action front-loaded and the qualifier placed right after. There is no unnecessary wording, and every word contributes meaning.

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 annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is too thin to fully equip an agent. It omits return value structure, default behavior, and any detail about what 'declared' versus 'loaded' means, leaving significant gaps for a search tool.

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% and the description does not explain either parameter. While 'query' and 'limit' are somewhat self-explanatory from their names and schema constraints, the description does not clarify what fields query searches against or exactly how limit affects results, so the agent is left without crucial semantics.

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 states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('declared and loaded router tools'), and adds a distinguishing qualifier ('without starting cold backends') that sets it apart from siblings like list_backends, load_tool, and call_tool. An agent can clearly understand what this tool does and how it differs at a high level.

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 qualifier 'without starting cold backends' implies a lightweight search context, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives such as list_backends or load_tool, nor does it provide exclusions or conditions. Usage guidance is only implicit.

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