search_defi_ux

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

Discloses matching algorithm ('simple substring relevance') and return type (top matching entries). No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; missing details on edge cases, ordering, or side effects, but adequate for a read-only search.

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?

Two sentences, clearly front-loaded with purpose and usage. No redundant words or phrases.

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 simple search tool with two parameters and no output schema, description covers scope, matching method, usage context, and distinguishes from siblings. No gaps identified.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. Tool description does not add additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, resulting in baseline score.

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?

Clearly states 'Free-text search across the entire Ray Group DeFi UX corpus' and lists specific sub-corpora (rubric areas, patterns, glossary). Distinguishes from sibling tools (exact slug lookups) by describing free-text search.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when the agent has a specific question... and wants the most relevant entries surfaced without knowing the exact slug.' Provides examples and implies alternative tools for exact lookups, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use.

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