registry_search

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that results are ranked and returns names, slugs, and service summaries, but does not explain ranking criteria, authentication needs, rate limits, or pagination beyond the limit parameter. Adequate but not fully detailed.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second gives usage guidance, third describes output. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

No output schema, but description partially compensates by mentioning return fields (names, slugs, service summaries). However, it lacks details on response structure (e.g., array format). Overall, sufficient for a search tool with optional parameters.

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 100% with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond summarizing the use case (e.g., 'by vertical, location, and country'). No new parameter details, so 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 'Search for Servicialo-compatible organizations by vertical, location, and country' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tool registry_get_organization by noting when not to use it.

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?

Explicitly says to use as primary discovery tool and provides an example ('find a physiotherapist in Santiago'). Also states not to use if org_slug is known, directing to registry_get_organization. No exclusions but clear context.

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