Search funded engineering bounties

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable context: it is a 'public bounty API' with 'no-auth', which informs the agent about accessibility and safety. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key information. Every word is meaningful; no redundancy or filler.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is brief. It misses return format, pagination details, and ordering. However, annotations partially compensate with openWorldHint. Adequate but has gaps.

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?

With only 29% schema coverage, the description must compensate but only provides high-level filter categories. It does not detail individual parameters like min/max_price_cents or default values. The listing of filter types is minimal help.

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 verb 'search', the resource 'bounties', and the API context with filters (category, funding, price, text). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_bounty' (single bounty) and 'search_assets' (different resource).

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 mentions 'no-auth public' implying accessibility, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_bounty' for a specific bounty, 'search_assets' for assets). No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are stated.

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