One keyword search across everything — about, services, products, and the journal. Returns ranked hits with a kind + ref you can then open with the matching tool.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that results are 'ranked hits with a kind + ref' and hints at subsequent tool usage, but lacks details on read-only nature, rate limits, or behavior with no results. No contradiction with annotations (none present).
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, no fluff, front-loaded with core function. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.
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 one required parameter, no annotations, and an output schema (so return values need not be detailed), the description is largely complete. It mentions output structure and next steps, but lacks sibling guidance. Adequate for a simple 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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning by stating 'one keyword search' implying the query parameter is a keyword, but does not elaborate on format, length limits, or comparison with schema properties. Baseline 3 is appropriate given schema simplicity.
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 explicitly states 'One keyword search across everything — about, services, products, and the journal,' providing a specific verb (search) and resource (site) with clear scope. It distinguishes from siblings like list_journal or list_products, which are for browsing specific categories.
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 implies search is for cross-category queries but does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., browsing specific lists) or provide exclusion criteria. No alternative tools are mentioned.
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 has a distinct purpose: about_virohana provides background, list_journal and read_post handle journal content, list_products and product_detail handle products, list_services and service_detail handle services, search_site provides cross-domain search, and start_here offers a guided tour. No two tools overlap significantly.
Tool names use snake_case consistently, with a pattern of 'verb_noun' for lists (list_journal, list_products, list_services) and 'noun_detail' for details (product_detail, service_detail). However, about_virohana and start_here break the pattern slightly, and read_post and search_site are descriptive but not exactly verb-noun. Overall, naming is clear and predictable.
With 9 tools, the set is well-scoped for a company information site. It covers core functions: about, journal, products, services, search, and a guided start. No tool is redundant, and the count is appropriate for the domain.
The tool surface provides comprehensive coverage of the Virohana site: background (about_virohana), journal listing and reading (list_journal, read_post), product listing and details (list_products, product_detail), service listing and details (list_services, service_detail), full-site search (search_site), and an entry point (start_here). There are no obvious gaps for a read-only informational website.