search_design_system

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It implies a read-only operation through the verb 'search' and mentions the combined search scope, but it does not disclose return format, pagination, or any limitations. This is adequate for a simple search tool but lacks richer context.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no redundancy. It states the core function and a usage tip efficiently, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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, with well-described parameters and a clear purpose. The description covers what it searches and when to use it, but since there is no output schema, a brief note on the result format would enhance completeness. Nevertheless, for a keyword search tool, the provided context is sufficient.

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 provides 100% coverage for both parameters, with clear descriptions for 'query' and 'limit'. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already offers, so the baseline of 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 the tool searches 'color tokens, components, and guidelines at once' using keywords. The verb 'search' is specific, the resource is explicit, and the scope distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on individual item types.

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 you don't know which tool to use, use this first,' giving clear context for when to choose this tool. However, it does not name specific alternatives or provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

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