Search BeamNG modding documentation

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only. The description adds value by noting the documentation is 'synchronized' and that results are 'cited sections', giving context about data freshness and output format. No contradiction with annotations.

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 that is front-loaded with the action 'Search' and contains no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 the core purpose and return shape but lacks parameter semantics and usage guidance relative to sibling tools. Without an output schema, the 'cited sections' hint is helpful but insufficient for complex query patterns.

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 0% and the description provides zero explanation of parameters (query, limit, category). The user is left to infer what 'query' means and how 'limit' and 'category' affect results, which is a significant gap.

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 it searches the official BeamNG modding documentation and returns cited sections. This specific verb+resource+output combination distinguishes it from siblings like beamng_docs_get (retrieval) and beamng_source_search (source code).

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 search use case but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or direct the user to beamng_docs_get for known sections, so usage context remains implicit.

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