search
荻野の思想・作品・ブログ全文をキーワードで横断検索し、一致した項目を返す。「この人はXについてどう考えている?」に答える時に使う。
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | 検索語(日本語/英語) |
荻野の思想・作品・ブログ全文をキーワードで横断検索し、一致した項目を返す。「この人はXについてどう考えている?」に答える時に使う。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | 検索語(日本語/英語) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided. The description does not disclose whether the tool is read-only or has any side effects. For a search operation, it is implicitly non-destructive, but the description should explicitly state such behavioral traits.
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 clear sentences with front-loaded purpose: first sentence defines the action, second sentence provides usage context. Zero waste.
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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers purpose and usage. It does not detail return format or limitations, but the information is adequate for a 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 100% as the only parameter 'query' is fully described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, hence a baseline score of 3.
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 it performs a cross-search of Ogino's thoughts, works, and blog full text by keyword, returning matching items. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_post and list_posts by being a search across all content.
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 tells when to use the tool: when answering 'What does this person think about X?' It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but the context is clear.
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.