Search GW1 content

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool searches only 'current public content', which is a behavioral boundary, but it does not mention possible rate limits, latency, or that it queries external live endpoints. The verb 'search' implies a read-only operation, but no added detail beyond that.

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?

A single sentence with no redundancy, front-loaded with the primary action and scope. Every word adds value.

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 lacks any mention of the return format or result structure, despite there being no output schema. It also does not explain how this tool relates to the sibling tools (e.g., when to use this vs. a single-source search). For a multi-source aggregator, this leaves gaps in an agent's ability to invoke and interpret results correctly.

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 schema has zero descriptions, but the description maps the cryptic enum values (wiki, pvx, etc.) to human-readable source names. However, it does not explain the query, includeAuthors, or limitPerSource parameters, though those are reasonably inferable from their names and schema defaults.

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 uses the specific verb 'Search' and names the exact resources (Guild Wars Wiki, PvXwiki, GW1 Builds, YouTube, r/GuildWars) plus a scope qualifier ('current public content'). This clearly distinguishes it from the single-source sibling tools like gw1_wiki_search or gw1_subreddit_search.

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 implies a multi-source search use case but does not explicitly state when to choose this over the sibling single-source tools, nor does it mention alternatives or exclusions. The context is clear but lacks direct guidance.

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