Full-text search across the Masnavi. Returns beyts that contain the query terms, ranked by relevance. Useful for finding where a theme, word, or phrase appears.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes | Persian text to search for | |
| daftar | No | Restrict to a single daftar (1-6) | |
| offset | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| match | No | exact | |
| query | Yes | ||
| total | Yes | ||
| results | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that it performs full-text search and ranks results by relevance, and scopes to the Masnavi. However, it does not mention read-only behavior, pagination, or any limitations, leaving significant gaps in behavioral disclosure.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and behavior, and includes a useful use case. Every sentence earns its place, with no wasted words.
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 output schema exists, so return format is covered. The description explains what is searched and the type of results, but lacks guidance on choosing among sibling tools and doesn't mention pagination parameters. It is adequate for a simple search but has notable omissions in context.
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 only 50% (query and daftar are described), but the description text adds no parameter details beyond the schema. It does not explain limit or offset semantics, which are undocumented in the schema, and does not compensate for this gap.
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 ('search') and resource ('Masnavi'), and states it returns beyts ranked by relevance. This clearly identifies the tool's function, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling search tools like search_divan or search_meaning.
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 a clear use case ('finding where a theme, word, or phrase appears'), but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no exclusions are mentioned. The context is clear but incomplete for a tool with several similar siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool clearly targets a distinct operation: commentary, section title search, range retrieval, section retrieval, specific beyt lookup, random selection, full-text search, semantic search, table of contents, and quote verification. No overlap in purpose.
Names are a mix of single verbs (explain, lookup, verify, search) and verb_noun with underscores (find_sections, get_range, get_section, search_meaning, random_beyt, table_of_contents). While readable, the lack of a uniform pattern reduces consistency.
With 10 tools, the server covers all essential operations for exploring and verifying Masnavi content without being overwhelming. The count is well-scoped for its purpose.
The tool surface is comprehensive for a reference server: browsing, various search modes, targeted retrieval, commentary access, and quote verification. No obvious gaps for typical user queries.
