search_catalog

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it describes the return format ('service listings with pricing, descriptions, and provider reputation scores') and explicitly states 'No authentication required.' However, it doesn't mention rate limits, pagination behavior beyond parameters, or error conditions.

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?

Three efficient sentences with zero waste: first states purpose, second details search dimensions, third covers returns and authentication. Every sentence earns its place and information is front-loaded appropriately.

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?

For a search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good coverage: purpose, usage context, return format, and authentication requirements. It could be more complete by mentioning pagination behavior or result format details, but covers the essentials well given the tool's complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents all 7 parameters. The description adds marginal value by mentioning the searchable dimensions (keyword, category, service type, price range) but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the parameter descriptions.

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 specific action ('Search'), target resource ('the402.ai service marketplace'), and what it finds ('AI agent services'). It distinguishes this search tool from browsing or listing tools among siblings by focusing on keyword/category/price filtering.

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 for when to use this tool ('Find AI agent services by keyword, category, service type, or price range'), but doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among sibling tools like 'browse_products' or 'list_services' (if such existed).

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