Full-text search the Eco game wiki (items, recipes, skills, categories, animals, plants, biomes). Returns matching pages with their kind, name, slug, and a snippet. Use the slug with the matching wiki_get_* tool to read full facts. ALWAYS search first to find the right slugs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 8). | |
| query | Yes | What to search for (e.g. "iron bar", "carpentry", "deer"). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the return format (kind, name, slug, snippet) and the tool's role as a precursor to wiki_get_*, which is useful behavior. It does not mention rate limits or edge cases, but for a read-only search tool this is sufficient.
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 the main purpose in the first sentence, and provides only essential instructions in the second. No filler.
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 fully covers the tool's purpose, scope, return payload, and relationship to sibling tools. Given the simple parameter set and lack of output schema, it is complete.
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?
The input schema already provides complete descriptions for both parameters (query and limit), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema offers.
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 action ('Full-text search') and the resource ('the Eco game wiki') along with the content types covered. It distinguishes itself from sibling wiki_get by explicitly directing users to use the returned slug with wiki_get_* for full facts.
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 explicit usage guidance: 'ALWAYS search first to find the right slugs' and points to the follow-up tool (wiki_get_*) for reading full facts. This establishes a clear workflow and when to use the tool.
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.
search and wiki_search both perform full-text search over the Eco wiki and return similar ranked matches, making them easy to confuse. fetch and wiki_get also overlap as page-retrieval tools, though the crafting calculators are clearly differentiated.
Most tools use a wiki_ prefix, but fetch and search break that pattern, and the suffixes are stylistically mixed (wiki_bom, wiki_calc, wiki_total_raw, wiki_contract_basics). The names remain readable and consistently lowercase snake_case, so the inconsistency is moderate rather than chaotic.
Ten tools is a reasonable size for a wiki server covering search, retrieval, structured facts, numeric analysis, and crafting calculations. The count is slightly padded by the duplicate search tools and overlapping retrieval tools, but it is not excessive.
The tool set covers browsing, full-text search, structured entity facts, ranking, aggregation, multiple crafting-depth views, and gameplay mechanics like contracts. There are no obvious read-side dead ends, and write operations are appropriately absent for a wiki reference server.