dictionary_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'prefix-search' and 'offline' but does not disclose the output format (e.g., list of words, definitions), behavior on no results, or any rate limits. For a search tool, more transparency about results is needed.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the action and resource. It front-loads the verb 'Prefix-search' and provides essential context without extraneous 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?

Given 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the purpose but lacks details about return values or limitations. It mentions offline corpus but not pagination or empty results. Completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters have descriptions). The description adds context for the 'query' parameter (prefix-search) but not for 'limit' or 'language' beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 due to coverage, with minor added value.

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's function: prefix-search the offline Wiktextract corpus for words. It distinguishes from siblings like dictionary_lookup (exact match) and dictionary_spelled_like (similar spelling) by specifying 'prefix-search' and the use case for unknown spelling.

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 includes a usage hint ('Useful when you don't know the exact spelling'), which helps the agent decide when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with sibling tools like dictionary_suggest or dictionary_random.

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