search-tools

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description carries minimal burden. It adds that the tool returns tool names and descriptions across all categories, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or potential side effects. Given annotation coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 consists of two short sentences that efficiently convey purpose, output, and usage guidance. Every word adds value with no unnecessary detail.

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 the tool's role as a discovery tool with 3 parameters fully described, no output schema but a clear statement of return content, and annotations covering safety and scope, the description is largely complete. It could mention pagination or result ordering, but the limit parameter partially addresses that. Overall, it provides adequate context for the tool's purpose.

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 all three parameters are described in the input schema. The description adds the context of 'natural language query' and 'across all categories,' but does not provide meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 action ('Discover available tools') and resource ('tools across all categories'), and differentiates from siblings by being the search entry point. It specifies the output ('matching tool names + descriptions') and the context ('54-tool surface').

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 this first to navigate the 54-tool surface efficiently,' providing clear guidance on when to use it. While it does not list alternatives or exclusion cases, the instruction implies it is the recommended starting point before using specific tools like the 18 listed siblings.

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