bsdd_text_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the search scope and optional dictionary URI filtering, but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention pagination behavior or result format. For a search tool, this is minimally adequate but lacks richer behavioral context.

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 compact at two sentences, with the core action and scope in the first sentence and usage guidance in the second. No unnecessary words, and the examples are efficiently integrated.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what is searched, optional filtering, and example queries. It omits explicit mention of pagination (limit/offset) or result format, but these are partially addressed in the schema. Overall, it provides sufficient context for a search tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds a couple of example search texts and reinforces the dictionary URI filter, but it does not provide any new semantics beyond what the schema already documents. The examples are helpful but not essential.

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?

Description uses the specific verb 'search' with a clear resource scope: 'across all bSDD content (classes, properties, dictionaries)'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like bsdd_search_classes, which likely targets a more limited scope. The examples ('fire resistance', 'thermal conductivity') help clarify the intended query types.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use for broad discovery queries' and provides example search terms. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when not to use, but the sibling list is present and the instruction makes the primary use case clear.

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