midnight_search_docs

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

The description is straightforward about being a search tool with no destructive hints. It could be more explicit about being read-only, but the name and purpose imply safety. No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden, and it does so adequately.

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 concise (about 100 words), uses bullet points for readability, and front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and usage. It does not describe return format or pagination, which would be helpful but isn't critical given the tool's simplicity.

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 two parameters (query, category) with 50% description coverage (query described, category only as enum). The description lists categories in natural language but doesn't explicitly link to the parameter or explain how to use it effectively. This is adequate but not enhanced.

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 official Midnight documentation, lists specific categories (Compact, SDK, tutorials, API, examples), and provides usage examples. It distinguishes from sibling tools like midnight-fetch-docs and midnight-list-docs, which handle fetching or listing specific docs, by focusing on 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 lists explicit use cases (find features, syntax, examples, concepts), which guides when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context of sibling tools makes it clear.

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