search_tokens

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

Without annotations, the description partially covers behavioral traits by disclosing truncation behavior and advising against reporting it as failure. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, authentication needs, or rate limits, leaving gaps in complete transparency.

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 concise, front-loading the core purpose and then providing actionable usage hints. Every sentence serves a clear function without redundancy.

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 9 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description does not fully cover what the agent needs. It explains search and truncation but omits details about the output structure (e.g., which fields are returned).

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 each parameter described. The description adds value by contextualizing the limit parameter's role in truncation handling, which is not covered in 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 tool is for searching design tokens by various criteria, with specific example queries like 'What color tokens exist?'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (e.g., list_dimensions) by focusing on search and discovery rather than enumeration.

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 usage guidance with example questions and explicit instructions for handling truncated results by fetching more with limit. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_dimensions for full listings.

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