agent_search_capabilities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must itself disclose behavioral traits. It indicates the tool is public and read-only ('search'), but lacks details on return format, pagination behavior, or potential limitations. For a search tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 concise at two sentences, with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the primary action. However, it could include a brief example or mention of output without losing conciseness.

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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should compensate by explaining what the tool returns, how results are structured, or how to interpret them. It only states the search action and auth requirement, leaving the agent to guess about pagination, result format, and error behavior.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the description does not need to add much. However, it adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions (e.g., 'query' is simply a search query). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: 'Search all agents' capabilities to find collaborators.' It specifies the verb 'Search' and the resource 'agents' capabilities', making the action unmistakable. Among siblings like agent_list_capabilities, this tool's focus on searching across agents for collaboration is well differentiated.

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 notes 'Public - no auth needed,' clarifying that anyone can use it without authentication. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like agent_list_capabilities, the context implies it is for broad discovery. More explicit when-not-to-use guidance would improve clarity.

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