Search AI Canvas components

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

Beyond the read-only/open-world/idempotent annotations, the description discloses fuzzy matching behavior, the specific fields searched, relevance ranking, and that results include screenshot URLs and install commands. This adds meaningful behavioral context without contradicting annotations.

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 sentences: the first states the core function, and the second adds usage examples and result contents. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy, and it is front-loaded with the essential action.

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 simple search tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers what is searched, how results are ordered, and what results contain (screenshots and install commands). Combined with schema and annotations, it provides enough context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema already fully documents both parameters (query and limit), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying the fields searched (slug, name, description, categories, tags) and noting the fuzzy, relevance-ranked nature of the search, going beyond the schema's generic description.

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 it is a fuzzy keyword search across component slug, name, description, categories, and tags, returning ranked matches. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_components (listing) and get_component (retrieval by ID).

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 'Use when the user describes what they want in their own words' with concrete examples, providing clear context for when to use the tool. It doesn't name alternatives, but the guidance is strong enough to differentiate it from listing or retrieval tools.

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