Search Swagger API

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. It adds valuable behavioral context: search scope, default for include_deprecated, default/max limit, and response fields, giving a clear picture beyond the 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?

The description is well-structured with sections for parameters, response, and examples. It is lengthy but every sentence earns its place, and the front-loaded summary makes intent immediately clear. No filler or redundant content.

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 the complexity (5 params, filters, response fields), the description is complete: it covers search behavior, filters, defaults, response content, and examples. With an output schema present and good annotations, there are no significant gaps.

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% (all parameters described in schema). The description still adds meaning beyond schema by providing example keywords, explaining the source origin from swagger_list_sources, and clarifying enum usage (HTTP method). This compensates with practical guidance.

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's function: 'Search API interfaces in the internal Swagger documentation' and specifies the searchable fields (name, description, path, module). This distinguishes it from siblings like swagger_list_sources (lists sources) and swagger_get_api_detail (fetches details).

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 concrete usage context through examples and notes that the 'source' parameter comes from swagger_list_sources results. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention exclusions, which prevents a perfect score.

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