shodan_search_queries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the 'directory' framing but no additional behavioral context such as pagination behavior, result format, or whether the directory is public vs. user-specific.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler words, making it highly concise. However, its extreme brevity sacrifices potentially useful usage or differentiation context.

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?

The tool is simple and the annotations cover the safety profile, but there is no output schema and the description fails to differentiate from the very similar sibling 'shodan_saved_queries'. The result format and intended use case are left implicit.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both 'query' and 'page' are adequately documented in the schema. The description does not add extra parameter semantics or usage nuances beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a clear verb ('Search') and resource ('directory of saved queries'), conveying the tool's basic purpose. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tool 'shodan_saved_queries', so the agent must infer the distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'shodan_search' or 'shodan_saved_queries'. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context clues beyond the bare statement of searching a directory.

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