search_x402_apis

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes key behavioral traits: the tool performs searches (not mutations), costs $0.01 USDC per search on Base mainnet, and returns ranked results with specific metadata. It could improve by mentioning response format or error handling.

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 efficiently structured in three sentences: the first explains what the tool does, the second provides usage guidance, and the third discloses cost information. Every sentence adds value with zero waste.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 100% schema coverage, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage, cost, and result format well, but could benefit from mentioning response structure or error cases to be fully comprehensive for a search tool.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 searches through 13,000+ x402-enabled HTTP APIs using specific criteria (capability, category, network, keyword) and returns ranked results with endpoint URLs, pricing, and payment metadata. It specifies the verb 'search' and resource 'x402-enabled HTTP APIs' with no siblings to differentiate from.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: 'to discover paid APIs for any capability your agent needs.' It does not mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives, but with no sibling tools, this guidance is sufficient for the given context.

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