Search the Swarmnest Directory

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: keyword search is conjunctive ("all keywords must match") and applies typo correction, plus it lists which fields come back. It doesn't state result ordering or ranking, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

One paragraph that is front-loaded with purpose, then filters, then return fields, then usage examples — a sensible order. The long enumeration of tool types ("coding agents, browser automation, vector databases...") is slightly padded, though it does communicate corpus breadth.

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?

With 7 all-optional parameters, no output schema and annotations already covering the safety profile, the description covers what an agent still needs: what gets matched, how matching works, how to page with limit/offset, and exactly which fields come back in each result.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: the AND-matching rule for query, the fact query is optional when category or os is given, and that category values are slugs sourced from list_categories. Enum meanings (pricing/auth/os) are restated but not extended.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource: keyword search over the Swarmnest directory of AI agent tools, with the corpus enumerated (MCP servers, LLM APIs, frameworks, etc.). It points at list_categories as a helper but never explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling search_skills, so the agent must infer the corpus difference rather than being told.

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?

Gives a clear operational context ("Use it to find or compare tools for a job") with three concrete example queries, and the schema-level note that query is optional when category or os is supplied. Missing an explicit when-not/alternative clause versus search_skills, so it's strong context without exclusions.

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