ui_ux_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'Search by keyword' without clarifying the output format (e.g., list of matching items, snippets), whether results are ranked, or any limitations. This lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about what to expect from the call.

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 extremely concise—one sentence with clear front-loading of the verb and resource. Every word serves a purpose, and there is no unnecessary information, making it easy for an agent to quickly grasp the tool's core function.

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 tool's simplicity (single required parameter, no output schema), the description is marginally adequate. It does not explain return behavior or how results relate to sibling tools. For a search tool, stating what the output represents would improve completeness, but the current version is minimally functional.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already provides a descriptive text for the 'query' parameter with examples. The tool-level description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema offers, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Search' and identifies the resource as 'UI/UX principles and component patterns'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ui_ux_list_principles (which lists all) and ui_ux_get_principle (which retrieves a specific item), indicating a focused search capability.

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 phrase 'by keyword' implies use when the exact principle or pattern name is unknown and a free-text search is needed. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over listing or retrieval siblings, nor does it mention any conditions for usage.

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