sk_dp_search_guidelines

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention any behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, output format, or whether the search is read-only. The description focuses on content scope but omits operational details, leaving the agent with limited understanding of side effects or response characteristics.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It includes useful examples without unnecessary fluff, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description adequately covers the search scope and examples. Since there is no output schema, it does not need to detail return values. However, it could mention that results are likely a list of matching documents with metadata, but the absence of that is a minor gap.

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 itself does not add much beyond what the schema already provides, though it does align with the query examples. It does not enhance understanding of the 'type' or 'topic' parameters beyond schema definitions.

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 the tool searches ÚOOÚ SR guidance documents, with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('guidance documents'). It also lists specific types (usmernenia, stanoviská, metodické pokyny) and example topics, making its purpose distinct from sibling tools like search_decisions.

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 provides clear context about what it searches (guidance documents) and includes examples of topics, implying appropriate use cases. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., 'for decisions, use search_decisions'), missing an opportunity for differentiation.

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