Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• searxngsearchC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'privacy-respecting' and 'returns relevant web content,' but doesn't disclose key behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what 'relevant' entails (e.g., ranking, source diversity). For a search tool with no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is concise and front-loaded, stating the core purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence adds useful context about returns and parameters without redundancy. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points), but it's efficient with zero waste.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's moderate complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and hints at behavior, but lacks details on output format, error cases, or operational constraints. Without annotations or output schema, more context would help the agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 8 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'customizable parameters' but doesn't provide additional semantics or context for parameter usage. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool performs web searches using SearXNG, specifying it's a privacy-respecting metasearch engine. It distinguishes the tool by mentioning its privacy focus and customizable parameters, though without siblings, differentiation isn't needed. However, it could be more specific about the exact verb and resource (e.g., 'search the web' rather than 'perform web searches').

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or contextual constraints. It mentions 'customizable parameters' but doesn't explain when specific settings are appropriate. Without siblings, this is less critical, but it still lacks usage context for the agent.

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