Search stamp collections using filters for name, description, or creator, with sorting and pagination to locate specific sets.
Search for stamp collections with various filtering criteria
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number | |
| query | No | Search query for collection name or description | |
| creator | No | Filter by creator address | |
| sort_by | No | Sort field | created_at |
| page_size | No | Items per page | |
| sort_order | No | Sort order | DESC |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'various filtering criteria' but doesn't explain what happens when no filters are applied, whether results are paginated (implied by schema but not stated), what the response format looks like, or any rate limits/authentication requirements. For a search tool with 6 parameters, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.
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, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundancy. It's appropriately sized for a search tool and front-loads the essential information.
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 search tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what constitutes a 'stamp collection' versus individual stamps, what fields are searchable beyond name/description, what the response contains, or how results are structured. The agent would need to guess about important behavioral aspects despite having a complete parameter schema.
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 schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds minimal value beyond stating 'various filtering criteria' - it doesn't explain how parameters interact, what 'creator address' means in context, or provide examples of effective queries. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding.
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 verb ('search') and resource ('stamp collections'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'search_stamps' or 'search_tokens' - both are search tools for different resources. The description could be more specific about what makes stamp collections unique versus other searchable entities.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple search tools available (search_stamps, search_tokens), the agent has no indication whether this is for collections of stamps versus individual stamps versus tokens. There's no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or relationships to other tools like 'get_collection'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.