search_apis

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

With no annotations, description discloses search algorithm (BM25), search scope (across API titles, descriptions, tags, endpoint names), and output format (ranked results with relevance scores). Lacks details on authentication or rate limits, but acceptable for a search tool.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words, front-loaded with primary action. Each sentence adds distinct information: what it does, scope, and output.

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?

Covers main aspects: search mechanism, fields searched, and return format. No output schema, but description sufficiently explains results. Minor missing detail on whether results include full API objects or just IDs.

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 parameter descriptions; description adds value by explaining that search covers multiple fields and uses BM25 ranking, providing context beyond parameter names and types.

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?

Description clearly states 'search' with specific verb and resource ('OmniStream marketplace'), uses BM25 ranking, searches across multiple fields (titles, descriptions, tags, endpoint names), and distinguishes from siblings like list_apis and get_api.

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?

Implies usage for keyword-based search, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like list_apis for browsing or get_api for specific APIs. However, the search intent is clear and contextually sufficient.

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