search-gdweb-designs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool applies a dashboard-managed exclusion list, returns metadata for multiple results, and does not generate implementation documents. It does not describe response structure or any side effects, but the stated behaviors are meaningful for selection.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The usage condition is front-loaded, followed by behavioral boundaries and the alternative route. Every clause contributes selection or behavioral context.

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?

The description is complete enough for tool selection and invocation: it explains purpose, usage boundary, exclusion behavior, and non-generation of implementation documents. Since there is no output schema, the exact metadata fields returned are left vague, but this is a minor gap for a lightweight search-list 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%, with all five parameters documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific purpose: returning a lightweight list of GDWEB references with metadata, and explicitly contrasts itself with generate-gdweb-design-indexes. It clearly identifies what the tool does and how it differs from the most relevant sibling.

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 begins with 'Use this tool only when the user wants a lightweight list of GDWEB references,' giving an explicit trigger condition. It then names the alternative tool and the conditions under which that sibling should be used, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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