npm_search

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

As no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns specific fields (name, description, version, weekly downloads, last publish date), but does not cover additional behavioral traits such as sorting, pagination, or rate limits. The behavior is basic but not deeply transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence provides relevant information about the function and return values. No wasted words.

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 absence of an output schema, the description appropriately lists the return fields, making it clear what the agent can expect. It covers the essential context for a simple search tool, though it doesn't mention nuances like sort order or result relevance, which are not critical.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage for both parameters (keyword and limit) with descriptive text. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what is in the schema, so the baseline 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Search the npm registry for packages by keyword.' It uses a specific verb (search) and resource (npm registry), and also lists the return fields, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like npm_package_info or npm_dependency_audit.

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 usage for searching packages but does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives. There is no guidance about exclusions or scenarios where other tools like npm_package_info would be more appropriate, so it lacks explicit usage differentiation.

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