search_scrolls_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers minimal details. It doesn't indicate whether the operation is read-only (presumed but unstated), mention rate limits, or describe what 'semantic' specifically entails (e.g., embedding-based similarity).

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?

Concise two-sentence structure with front-loaded purpose. Every sentence contributes value—the first establishes function and scope, the second differentiates the search methodology. Slightly vague ('Find knowledge') prevents a perfect score.

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?

While an output schema exists (removing the need to describe return values), the description fails to explain the three filtering parameters (domain, scroll_type, limit) which are essential for effective use given the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for all 4 parameters. It implicitly acknowledges the 'query' parameter via the search concept, but provides no information about 'domain', 'scroll_type', or 'limit' filters, leaving critical functionality undocumented.

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?

States specific verb (search) and resource (published scrolls) with scope (across all). The 'semantic' qualifier and 'not just keywords' phrase help distinguish it from keyword-based siblings like lookup_scroll_tool, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 implied usage guidance through 'Find knowledge by meaning, not just keywords,' suggesting when semantic search is appropriate. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use rules or named alternatives from the sibling list.

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