search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it discloses the key behavioral trait: results arrive asynchronously, not in the immediate response. It also states the return shape (a search id). It does not mention error conditions, but those are less critical for a simple one-parameter search trigger.

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?

Two sentences, action first, no filler. Every clause contributes: the operation, the return value, and the follow-up call.

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 one-parameter async search trigger it is complete: it states what to pass (query, via the schema), what comes back (search id), and what to do next (search_results). It lacks deeper operational context like persistence or failure behavior, but the output schema and sibling names cover the rest.

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?

There is only a required `query` string, and the description does not document query syntax or formatting, so schema coverage is 0% and the description adds little beyond the parameter name. The phrase 'Search the Soulseek network' implies the query is the search term, which provides minimal compensation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search the Soulseek network.' It also distinguishes the tool from its sibling search_results by stating this call only returns a search id and results arrive later, making the role of each clear.

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?

It provides explicit workflow guidance: run this tool, get an id, then 'call search_results a few seconds later.' It does not spell out when to prefer search_label or when not to search, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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