bettermode_searchFull-text search across the community (members, spaces, posts, …). Provide a query term; results come back grouped by entity type, each hit with id, title, subtitle, content, url, and entityId. Bettermode GraphQL query: search.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Client-side cap on the number of hits per entity group (the SearchInput type has no server-side limit field). | |
| query | Yes | The search term. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds result format context but no further behavioral traits like rate limits or side effects beyond what annotations provide.
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, each sentence adds value: purpose then input/output details. No wasted words.
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?
No output schema, but description explains result structure (grouped by entity type with id, title, etc.) and parameters are fully documented in schema. Complete 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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description mentions 'query' but adds no new meaning beyond schema; limit parameter explanation is already in 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?
Description clearly states 'full-text search across the community' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling get/list tools for single entity types.
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?
Implies use when needing cross-entity search, but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or when-not-to-use. Sibling tools are listed but not referenced in description.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: get vs list for members, posts, spaces, plus get_network and search. There is no ambiguity between tools.
All tools follow a uniform 'bettermode_verb_noun' pattern with lowercase snake_case. Verbs are consistently 'get', 'list', or 'search'.
With 8 tools, the server covers the essential read operations for a community platform without being overwhelming or too sparse.
The tool set is entirely read-only; there are no create, update, or delete operations for members, posts, or spaces, which are significant gaps for comprehensive community management.