aztec_search_docs

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

No annotations exist, so the description fully bears the burden. It discloses the local-only nature, lack of API key, and absence of semantic search across full corpora. This level of limitation disclosure is transparent and helps manage expectations.

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, well-structured paragraph: purpose first, then context/limitation, then actionable fallback. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy. It is concise yet comprehensive.

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?

Despite lacking output schema and annotations, the description provides a complete picture: what the tool does, its limitation (local only), how to upgrade (get API key), and typical use cases. For a search tool with three simple parameters, this is sufficient.

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 clear descriptions for query, section, and maxResults. The description adds no further parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 Aztec documentation in local ripgrep-only mode, and distinguishes from siblings by specifying it's for already-cloned tutorials, guides, and API documentation. The contrast with non-local semantic search further clarifies its scope.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (local docs, tutorials, guides, API docs) and when to avoid (queries needing semantic search). Provides a concrete fallback: suggest obtaining an API key via Discord and configuring it. This is clear guidance for selection.

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