search_docs

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

With no annotations, the description bears full transparency burden. It describes the return content (API endpoints, guide topics, categories) but does not mention any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, authentication needs, or result limitations. It is adequate for a simple search but lacks depth.

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—two sentences with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and immediate outcome, making it efficient for an agent 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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects) and sibling tools, the description covers the essential information. Minor gaps include lack of output format details (e.g., count, ordering), but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters, including a description for 'keyword' that is similar to the tool description. The tool description does not add significant extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Search'), the resource ('Handsontable documentation topics by keyword'), and specifies the types of results ('API endpoints, guide topics, and categories'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings: 'get_doc' likely retrieves a single document, and 'list_categories' lists categories, while this tool provides broader search.

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 general search but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives ('get_doc', 'list_categories'). No 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer context.

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