hive_search_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description usefully adds what the matches contain (publisher, category, rating, rating count) and that they are 'top matches in that storefront', but says nothing about rate limits, result ordering, or what happens on no match.

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?

Compact at two sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the routing rule second. The parenthetical listing of returned fields is dense but earns its place given there is no output schema; minor length is the only cost.

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 read-only lookup with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly self-sufficient: it covers accepted input forms, returned fields, and downstream tool ordering. It stops short only on ordering/limit behavior, which the description's absence of pagination notes leaves implicit.

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 limit, query and country are already documented in the schema, and the description's enumeration of query forms duplicates the schema text. The 'top matches in that storefront' phrasing loosely ties to the country parameter but adds no new syntax or defaults beyond the schema. 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?

Specific verb ('Find') plus resource ('any app's id') with the accepted input forms spelled out. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from hive_app_details, hive_similar_apps and hive_app_reviews, so an agent can route to it without opening schemas.

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?

States the exact condition for use — 'when you only have a name' — and names the three sibling tools that should follow it. Explicit when-to-use and alternative routing are both present.

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