search_health_topicsFull-text search ODPHP/health.gov health topics by keyword (e.g. "colorectal", "diabetes", "blood pressure"). Returns matching topics with id, title, categories, and source URL. Use get_health_topic with an id for the full guidance.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| keyword | Yes | Search term, e.g. "colorectal cancer". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "keyword": "colorectal cancer screening"
+ },
+ {
+ "keyword": "diabetes"
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds context about return format and scope (ODPHP/health.gov topics), aligning with annotations. No contradictions.
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 examples, followed by guidance on next steps. Every sentence adds value with 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?
Given a single required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately specifies input behavior, return fields, and how to proceed for detailed guidance. No gaps.
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 a brief description. The tool description adds context by explaining full-text search and giving examples, slightly enriching the parameter meaning beyond the 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 clearly states it performs full-text search over ODPHP/health.gov health topics by keyword, provides examples, and specifies the return fields (id, title, categories, source URL). It also distinguishes from the sibling tool get_health_topic.
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 context for when to use (keyword search) and suggests using get_health_topic for full guidance. Implicitly contrasts with list_health_topics which would list all topics. Could be more explicit about alternatives, but adequate.
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.