search_docs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the search is semantic ('by meaning'), uses a local Xcode index, and returns full document text with code examples, uri, and match score. It does not mention failure modes or side effects, but this is a read-only search operation and the core behavior is well conveyed.

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 three concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second describes the return value, and the third gives actionable usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage context, return contents, and the underlying local-index mechanism. An output schema exists to document the exact return shape, and the schema documents all parameters. It could add a note about prerequisites or when to use list_frameworks first, but it is otherwise 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about the search approach and return format but does not add meaning to the parameters themselves beyond what the schema already provides for query, timeout, and frameworks.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Search Apple Developer Documentation by meaning, using Xcode's local documentation index.' It also explains what is returned (full document text, code examples, uri, match score), making the tool's function unmistakable and distinct from the sibling tools list_frameworks and doc_status.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this before answering from memory about Swift or Apple platform APIs.' It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the sibling tools are clearly different in purpose, so no exclusion is necessary.

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