search_postsSearch Karandeep Singh's blog (DevOps/AWS articles and cheatsheets). Returns ranked cards with title, URL, tags, date, reading time, and summary.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 8, cap 20). | |
| query | Yes | Search terms, e.g. 'aurora failover' or 'lambda cold start'. | |
| section | No | Optional: restrict to 'posts' or 'cheatsheets'. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail about result ranking and the card fields returned. It does not discuss edge cases like empty results, ranking logic, or rate limits, but the annotations lower the burden here.
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 compact sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose and immediately follows with the return format. There is no redundant or filler content; every phrase adds useful information.
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 search tool with three well-documented parameters and a rich annotation set, the description is quite complete. Since there is no output schema, describing the exact card fields is important and is done well. It could have added a bit more about ranking behavior or how to choose section, but the overall context is sufficient for 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents query, limit, and section. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so 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 uses the specific verb 'Search' with a clear resource ('Karandeep Singh's blog') and scope ('DevOps/AWS articles and cheatsheets'). It also states what the tool returns ('ranked cards with title, URL, tags, date, reading time, and summary'), which clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_recent, browse_by_tag, and read_post.
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 gives clear context: this tool is for searching the blog by free-text query and can be restricted to posts or cheatsheets. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over related alternatives like browse_by_tag or related_posts, nor does it list exclusions. The usage is clear but not exhaustive.
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.
Most tools have clear, distinct purposes: search, browse by tag, read, cheatsheets, related posts, and quiz. The only mild overlap is between browse_by_tag and search_posts, but their descriptions make the distinction clear. get_commands also overlaps slightly with get_cheatsheet and read_post, but it explicitly limits output to commands only.
Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern throughout: list_*, get_*, search_posts, read_post, related_posts, random_post, quiz_me. The naming convention is uniform and predictable, making the tool set easy to navigate for an agent.
11 tools is well-scoped for a blog-focused server. Each tool serves a distinct content-access or discovery need without feeling bloated or redundant. The count feels appropriate for the domain.
The server covers the core blog workflow well: discovering topics, searching posts, browsing tags, reading full content, extracting commands, and finding related content. A minor gap is the lack of a simple 'list all posts' endpoint, but list_recent, browse_by_tag, and search_posts provide sufficient alternatives.