Roblox Search Utility

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the search target and examples, but does not state whether the tool is read-only, if authentication is required, what happens on no results, or the return format. For a search tool with no annotations, more behavioral context is needed.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose and includes examples. Every word adds value; there is no redundancy or extraneous information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks details about return values, pagination, error handling, or rate limits. However, the parameter count is low, and the domain is well-known (search in Creator Store). The description is minimally adequate but could be more complete.

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 has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description adds context for the 'keyword' parameter by specifying the type of modules to search for, which is helpful. However, it does not add meaning for the 'limit' parameter beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already covers parameters.

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 action ('search'), the specific resource ('developer utility modules, helper libraries, debugging tools, or signal classes'), and the store ('Roblox Creator Store'). It provides concrete examples (promise, maid, spring module) and distinguishes from sibling tools like roblox_search_asset3d or roblox_search_toolbox, which target different asset types.

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 uses 'specifically' to indicate when to use this tool (for developer utilities), but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide conditions for when not to use it. An explicit exclusion or mention of when to use a different sibling tool would improve clarity, but the scope is well-defined.

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