eds_search_pages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the search operates on a 'site query index' and covers specific fields, but does not explain read-only nature, result ordering, error conditions, or pagination behavior (though limit/offset exist in schema). This is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action, target, and search scope without unnecessary words. It is highly concise and easy to parse.

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 the moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description is sufficient to understand the core function but does not describe the return format or result structure. It implies the result is a list of pages but omits details like fields, sort order, or how matches are ranked.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely echoes the fields searched, which are already documented in the query parameter. No additional semantics for limit/offset are provided.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search'), identifies the resource ('pages'), and clearly distinguishes the scope ('across titles, descriptions, and paths in the site query index'). This makes it distinct from sibling tools like eds_list_pages, which likely lists all pages without a keyword filter.

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 implies usage for keyword-based search but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives like eds_list_pages or eds_get_page. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so the guidance is limited to the implied context.

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