slop_reference

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

With no annotations, the description effectively conveys the read-only nature of the tool and details the three output modes (compact, verbose, category counts). It covers the search behavior via query, category, and limit parameters, but does not mention any side effects or auth requirements, which are not expected 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?

The description is extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the purpose and key flags, and the second reiterates the flags. No unnecessary words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 the lack of output schema, the description adequately describes the output format for the three modes. It mentions the limit parameter for pagination. It is sufficiently complete for a search tool, though it could mention that results are sorted by relevance or similar.

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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds value by clarifying the default behavior (compact output) and the effect of verbose and list_categories flags, slightly improving usability beyond the schema.

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 the resource 'SLOP built-in functions'. It also specifies the default compact output and the flags for full details and category counts, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like slop_help or search_tools.

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 clear context on when to use this tool (searching functions) and explains output modes. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like search_tools, which would improve guidance.

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