semantic_search

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does mention a fallback from semantic to lexical search, which is good. However, it does not state if the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or any other side effects. The disclosure is useful but incomplete.

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 too short for a tool with three parameters and multiple siblings. It only has two sentences that are front-loaded but do not provide enough information to be useful. More detail is needed to justify its length.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema coverage, the description should compensate with thorough information. It only mentions the fallback behavior, leaving parameter meanings, expected return values, and sibling differentiation entirely unexplained.

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 does not mention any of the three parameters (k, kind, query). With 0% schema coverage, the burden falls entirely on the description, and it fails to provide any meaning beyond the parameter names. The agent cannot infer what 'kind' or 'k' represent.

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 it performs natural-language semantic search over HICAR code and docs, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling search tools like search_docs or search_model_variables, leaving ambiguity about when to use this one.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for use. The fallback behavior is noted but not as a usage guideline.

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