search_documents

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

With no annotations provided, the description holds the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'full-text search' and 'ranked snippets', but does not disclose important traits: pagination defaults, sorting behavior, whether filters are inclusive/exclusive, or any rate limits. The safety profile (read vs. write) is implied but not confirmed.

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 very concise at two sentences with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, given the tool's complexity (10 parameters), a slightly longer description might be justified. Still, it earns a high score for avoiding verbosity.

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 tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It covers only the basic search and result format, omitting all filtering, sorting, and pagination capabilities. The agent lacks critical context for effective usage.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only explains the 'query' parameter (as 'keyword'), ignoring 9 other parameters including sort, limit, offset, direction, date_filter, document_id, collection_id, status_filter, and user_id. The agent cannot infer their purpose or constraints from the description.

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 'Full-text search documents by keyword' and indicates what it returns ('ranked snippets with their documents'). It effectively distinguishes this search tool from sibling tools like list_documents (listing all) or get_document (single document retrieval).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No usage context, prerequisites, or recommendations are given. The agent has no information about scenarios where search is preferred over listing or filtering.

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