search_by_keywords

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it only restates the core function without explaining how keyword matching works, default operator behavior, result ordering, pagination, or rate limits. The schema provides some parameter details, but the description adds no additional behavioral context.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action ('Search npm packages'). It contains no unnecessary words or filler, making it efficient and easy to scan.

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?

Despite having only a few parameters, the tool lacks an output schema and has no annotations. The description omits crucial context such as result format, sorting behavior, pagination limits, and how it differs from 'search_npm'. This makes the tool incomplete for an agent that needs to invoke it correctly without prior knowledge.

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 67% (2 of 3 params described). The description merely repeats the keyword concept and adds no extra meaning for 'size' or 'operator'. It does not clarify how keywords interact with the operator parameter or what the size controls. The description fails to compensate for the missing 'size' description in the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Search npm packages') with a clear scope ('by specific keywords/tags'). This distinguishes it from the sibling 'search_npm' tool, which likely performs a broader full-text search. The purpose is immediately understandable.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or the relationship to the sibling 'search_npm' tool. Users are left to infer usage context from the name and description alone.

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