search_gdex_docs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses little: no ranking/relevance behavior, no result limits or pagination, no behavior on zero matches, and no indication of whether it's substring, full-text, or semantic matching. "Returns matching skill sections" is the only behavioral detail.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with no wasted words. It is efficient, though the second sentence is close to redundant with the first.

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 one-parameter search tool, the essentials are present, and the missing return details are partly covered by the brief mention of matching skill sections (no output schema exists). Still, given the cluster of competing documentation tools, routing guidance is the notable gap.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents 'query'. The description adds nothing beyond restating 'by keyword'. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'Search GDEX documentation and skill files by keyword.' An agent immediately knows this is a documentation lookup tool. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling doc-retrieval tools like get_sdk_pattern, get_api_info, get_trading_guide, or explain_workflow, so routing among those is left ambiguous.

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?

'by keyword' implies the usage context (free-text lookup across docs), but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or mention of the doc-oriented siblings it overlaps with. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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