Keyword search across the diamond encyclopedia

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses case-insensitive matching, field-weighted ranking, and the return shape (term, category, definition snippet). This goes beyond the input schema and gives an agent a solid behavioral model of the search operation.

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?

Three purposeful sentences with no fluff. The resource scope, ranking behavior, result shape, and sibling pointer are all packed in efficiently.

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 simple search tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains ranking and return values, and covers the relationship to define. It does not mention empty-result behavior or error handling, but those are minor for this tool's complexity.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents both query and limit. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline of 3.

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 and resource: keyword search across the 90-entry encyclopedia. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool define by noting that define fetches a full entry, so an agent can clearly tell the tools apart.

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?

Provides clear context on what the tool does and explicitly points to define for fetching full entries, forming a reasonable when-to-use versus alternative. It does not spell out exhaustive when-not-to-use conditions, but the pointer to define is sufficient guidance for this setting.

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