search_text

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not mention side effects, permissions, or read-only nature. Although a search tool is likely read-only, this is not explicitly stated, leaving behavior partly undisclosed.

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 and directly to the point, with no redundant or irrelevant information. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and parameters.

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 presence of an output schema in the context, the description does not need to explain return values. It provides adequate information to invoke the tool correctly, though it lacks details on edge cases or query formatting nuances.

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 description covers all four parameters in the Args section, including the parameter names, expected values, and examples for query. It also clarifies default values. However, it does not elaborate on query syntax constraints beyond basic examples.

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 this is a full-text search tool for the Open English Translation, using SQLite FTS5. It is distinct from sibling tools like search_lemma and lookup_word by focusing on full-text search across the translation.

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 searching English text but does not explicitly instruct when to choose this over alternatives like search_lemma or lookup_word. No direct guidance is given on when to use this tool versus others.

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