Dodo Payments Docs

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It does disclose that the tool uses 'semantic search,' which is a behavioral trait, and mentions the coverage areas. However, it omits other useful behavior details such as result format, pagination, or any potential side effects (though search tools are inherently read-only). The transparency is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary verb and resource. It includes all necessary information (semantic search and the doc domains) without any unnecessary words or repetition.

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 search tool with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is quite complete. It tells the agent exactly what is searched and how. The only minor gap is the lack of detail about the return structure, but given the low complexity and read-only nature, the description suffices.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for the two parameters (query and limit), including descriptions and constraints. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states, such as the guidance to be specific in the query. Thus, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: to search Dodo Payments documentation via semantic search across specific doc areas (API Reference, SDK docs, BillingSDK, and guides). The verb 'search' and resource 'Dodo Payments documentation' are explicit and unambiguous, making it distinct from any potential sibling tools.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: whenever the user needs to find information in the Dodo Payments documentation. It lists the exact scopes (API Reference, SDK docs, etc.), so an agent can infer its applicability. No explicit exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, but the context is sufficiently clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.