search_floe_docs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It explains the matching semantics (whitespace-separated terms, case-insensitive, fields searched) and ranking (by number of terms hit). It lacks some details like pagination or empty-result behavior, but provides solid operational context.

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?

Three sentences, each packed with relevant detail: what it returns, how matching works, when to use it, and that no API key is required. No wasted words, front-loaded with the action.

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 low-complexity search tool with complete schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and return values. It is entirely sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so both parameters are documented. The description adds semantic value by clarifying how the query is processed (whitespace splitting, case-insensitivity, ranking), which goes beyond the schema's simple 'Search terms' description. The limit parameter defaults and bounds are already clear from schema.

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 the Floe documentation index (llms.txt) and returns matching pages with titles, URLs, and descriptions. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from the many API operation siblings by being the documentation search tool.

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 explicitly says to use it for 'how do I…' questions about the Floe API, x402 vendors, spend controls, or this MCP server, and notes no API key is required. It does not name alternatives or exclusion scenarios, but the sibling list makes the intended use clear.

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