Search the StitchAPI documentation semantically (hybrid BM25 + vector). Returns the most relevant doc sections as excerpts with deep links — never full pages. Follow up with get_doc to read a full page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results to return (default 5). | |
| query | Yes | Natural-language search query. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results are excerpts with deep links and never full pages. It could mention auth or error 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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence earns its place by explaining return format and follow-up. No 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?
For a simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the search behavior, result format, and relationship to get_doc, enabling correct invocation.
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% with parameter descriptions for query and limit. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond schema, so baseline 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?
Specific verb 'Search' + resource 'StitchAPI documentation' + method 'semantically (hybrid BM25 + vector)' clearly states what the tool does. It distinguishes from sibling get_doc by noting it returns excerpts, not full pages.
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?
Explicitly says to use this for semantic search and then follow up with get_doc to read a full page, naming the alternative and showing workflow.
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.
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: search_docs finds relevant sections, while get_doc retrieves full pages. There is no overlap in functionality, and the descriptions explicitly frame get_doc as a follow-up to search_docs.
Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores: search_docs and get_doc. The naming is predictable and clearly indicates the action and subject.
With only 2 tools, this is on the low end, but for a documentation server the scope is narrow and the pair is sufficient. Slightly under the typical 3-15 range, but the simplicity is appropriate for the purpose.
The core workflow of searching and then reading a full page is fully covered. Minor gaps exist, such as listing all documentation pages or browsing by category, but these are not essential for the stated purpose of documentation access.
