search_json

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses that the tool respects a maxResults limit (default 50) and hints at read-only behavior by returning nodes. It does not mention any destructive actions, auth requirements, or rate limits, but for a search tool this is adequate transparency.

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 four sentences, each adding essential information: purpose, output format, search mode support, and result limiting. No redundant sentences; well-structured for quick reading.

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 search tool with 5 parameters, the description covers core behavior and result limiting. No output schema is provided, but the description mentions JSONPath locations, which gives a clear expectation. Could mention pagination or performance, but sufficient for typical use.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that results include JSONPath locations and that search modes (key, value, path, all) match against different parts. This goes beyond the schema descriptions which only list modes without explaining the output format.

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 searches for keys, values, or paths in JSON structures, returning matching nodes with JSONPath locations. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like query_json, diff_json, etc., by focusing on search within a single JSON structure rather than comparison or transformation.

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 explains what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like query_json or validate_json. The sibling context includes query_json which might overlap, but no guidance is given. The description implies usage for searching, but misses exclusion criteria.

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