search_docs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only search operation but does not describe return format, pagination behavior, error conditions, or any side effects. This is a minimal disclosure that leaves the agent largely uninformed.

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 concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse, though it sacrifices informative content for brevity.

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 tool with four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how the search behaves, what result data looks like, or how 'limit' interacts with results. The version parameter's schema description is helpful but addresses only one aspect; overall the description is insufficient for confident invocation.

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 only 25% (only 'version' has a description), and the tool description itself adds no parameter meaning. It does not clarify 'topic', 'libraryId', or 'limit' semantics. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, leaving three of four parameters effectively undocumented.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Search a library's documentation by topic.' It clearly indicates this tool searches inside a library's documentation, which implicitly differentiates it from the sibling tool search_library. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with the sibling.

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 search_library, nor any exclusions. The only usage hint comes from the schema's version parameter description, which is about a specific parameter, not tool selection. There is no explicit 'when-to-use' or alternative routing.

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