dero_docs_search

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

Description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: 'In-process — no network round trip' reveals performance trait. Also describes output format (ranked matches with fields). Annotations readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false are consistent; no contradiction.

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?

Well-structured and front-loaded: first sentence states purpose, then performance note, then usage guidance, input requirements in bullet points, and output format. Each section is concise and purposeful, no wasted words.

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?

Complete for a search tool with no output schema: covers purpose, input constraints (required/optional, enum, default/max), output fields, and usage context. Includes guidance on when to call and example citations, making it self-contained.

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 descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds value by reinforcing required status, explaining product enum scope, clarifying section as 'slug prefix', and stating default/max for limit. This goes slightly beyond schema, justifying a 4.

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 DERO documentation index across four products (derod, tela, hologram, deropay) with 145+ pages. It uses a specific verb 'Search' and distinguishes from sibling tools like dero_docs_get_page and dero_docs_list by focusing on search across the index.

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?

Provides explicit 'When to call' guidance: when authoritative docs are needed or before constructing a citation. Lists specific scenarios (DVM, RPC methods, etc.) and advises to prefer returning canonical_url and slug as citation. Also includes 'Input Requirements (CRITICAL)' for correct usage.

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