search_modules

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the 'allowlisted' restriction and searchable fields, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not describe behavior like empty queries, default limits, or search matching semantics, leaving the agent with incomplete expectations for a read-only search tool.

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?

A single, sentence-length description that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and scope. No filler, front-loaded with the verb, and every word adds meaning.

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 an output schema and available sibling context, the description covers the essential purpose and searchable attributes. Minor gaps like edge-case search behavior and the meaning of 'allowlisted' are not critical for invocation, but there is slight room for more context.

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 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It does so for 'query' by specifying the search fields (name, FQCN, collection, description), but 'limit' is left to the schema's default without additional context. This provides partial compensation for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'allowlisted Ansible modules (gallery)' with explicit search criteria (name, FQCN, collection, description). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_collections and get_module_schema, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies its use for finding modules by various attributes, which is distinct from listing collections or retrieving schemas. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention exclusions, so guidance is somewhat implicit but still clear enough.

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