Search TAP registry

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds the workflow context of inspecting a service before querying, but does not disclose details like possible registry inconsistency, incomplete metadata, or response variability beyond what openWorldHint implies.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and resource, then states the usage condition and the recommended follow-up. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 that the output schema is present and annotations already convey the read-only, idempotent, and open-world behavior, the description covers the essential decision point: use when no preset fits and inspect before querying. It is slightly light on what 'inspect' should include, but the sibling tools and output schema fill most of the gap.

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 all three parameters, so the schema already explains query, maxrec, and registryUrl. The description adds no parameter-level guidance beyond the general registry-search context, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Search'), a specific resource ('VO registry metadata'), and the triggering condition ('when no built-in preset fits'). It also signals a follow-up workflow step ('inspect the selected service before querying it'), which distinguishes it from direct querying tools like starfetch_tap_query.

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 explicitly says when to use the tool ('when no built-in preset fits') and instructs to inspect the selected service before querying it. It does not name sibling alternatives directly, but the condition is clear enough for an agent to route between the registry search and the preset list.

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