Search the local tool catalog

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Does not execute anything.' It adds useful context beyond annotations with 'local Nock ranker' and 'Disabled by default,' which are not expressed in the structured metadata. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, each with a clear purpose: the main action, the safety caveat, and the operational default. Nothing is redundant or wasted.

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 an output schema exists and read-only annotations are present, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, non-execution, and the important 'Disabled by default' caveat, though it does not explain what 'disabled' means for invocation or how to enable it.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It does clarify that 'query' is the search text and 'k' limits the result count, but it leaves details such as null behavior, query syntax, and ranking semantics unspecified.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Return up to k MCP Tool objects matching query via the local Nock ranker.' It clearly scopes the operation to the local tool catalog and distinguishes it from 'execute' style siblings with 'Does not execute anything.'

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?

Usage is implied rather than explicit: an agent can infer this is for searching the local catalog without executing, but the description gives no direct when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not name alternatives like nock.resolve or nock.call.

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