searchSearch the DigitalNZ collection by keyword. Returns matching items with ids (pass an id to record), titles, creators/sources, dates and links.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page (1-based, default 1). | |
| limit | No | Max results (1-100, default 20). | |
| query | Yes | Keyword(s). | |
| _apiKey | No | DigitalNZ API key (optional) (auto-injected by the platform). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds value by specifying returned fields (ids, titles, creators/sources, dates, links) and pagination behavior, without contradicting annotations.
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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant information. Every word is meaningful.
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 read-only search tool with good annotations and schema, the description adequately explains return fields and pagination. It could mention error handling or result count limits, but overall it's complete enough.
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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds context about return structure (fields) and hints at integration with the 'record' tool ('pass an id to record'), which helps usage beyond schema.
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 states 'Search the DigitalNZ collection by keyword' with a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_within' by implying a top-level search scope.
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?
It clearly implies use for keyword search but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings like 'search_within' or other search-related tools.
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.
Several tools are difficult to distinguish: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are currently identical, and ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and ask_pipeworx have fuzzy boundaries. The polymarket_* family plus bet_research also overlap heavily, requiring agents to carefully parse long descriptions to avoid misselection.
Naming is predominantly snake_case with a verb-first pattern (ask_, search, subscribe, unsubscribe, list_) and clear prefix families like polymarket_ and pipeworx_. Minor deviations like ai_visibility_check and entity_profile use noun-first phrasing, but the overall pattern is still predictable and readable.
33 tools is heavy for any single server, and the count is especially inappropriate given the server is named Digitalnz but only two tools (search, record) serve that domain. The rest form an unrelated grab-bag of data research, prediction-market, AI-visibility, memory, and utility tools.
The research workflow is fairly well covered: ask/grounded/deep modes, entity resolution, comparisons, claim validation, subscriptions, and alerts all exist. However, the DigitalNZ surface is nearly absent—just search and record—which is a significant gap for the declared server name, while other domains like AI visibility and npm dependencies are isolated one-offs.