osrs_wiki_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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Search') but doesn't describe what the search returns (e.g., page titles, snippets, URLs), any rate limits, authentication needs, or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic function.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundancy. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the search returns (e.g., list of pages with metadata), how results are ordered, or any behavioral traits like pagination handling. For a search tool with no structured output documentation, this leaves the agent with insufficient context to use it effectively.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for all three parameters ('search', 'limit', 'offset'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as search syntax or result ordering. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Search') and resource ('OSRS Wiki for pages'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from most siblings by specifying the OSRS Wiki domain, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other search tools like 'search_data_file' or 'search_iftypes' that operate on different data sources.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it implicitly suggests use for searching the OSRS Wiki, it doesn't mention when to choose this over other wiki-related tools like 'osrs_wiki_get_page_info' or 'osrs_wiki_parse_page', nor does it provide any context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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