Search Ply components

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior; the description adds the valuable negative guarantee "Does not install" and points to the correct mechanism for the mutating step (npx ply-ui-cli add or add_components). It doesn't say how ranking or tie-breaking works or whether results are paginated, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler: purpose and match mode first, sibling differentiation second, side-effect and follow-up action last. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a 4-param search tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, nothing an agent needs to choose and invoke it correctly is missing; result ordering is implied by "rank" and no output schema exists to explain.

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 100%, including the query param's natural-language/substring semantics and the limit range, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description only echoes the query example ("dialog modal") and says nothing about tier or category beyond what the enum descriptions provide, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Rank Ply registry components") plus the matching mode (fuzzy or token match), and explicitly contrasts itself with list_components and get_component by name.

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?

Gives the trigger condition ("when the name is uncertain"), an example query, explicit exclusions ("Not a category browse"), and names both alternative tools with their respective use cases. Also covers the downstream action: instruct the user to run the CLI add command.

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