search_documentation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: results are 'automatically truncated if they would exceed 25,000 tokens,' and it explains parameter defaults and constraints (e.g., 'max_results: 1-1000'). However, it doesn't cover aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, followed by a structured list of parameters with clear explanations. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, but with an output schema), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, parameters, and key behavior (truncation), but lacks details on output format or error cases, though the output schema may mitigate this. For a search tool, it's reasonably comprehensive.

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 0%, so the description must compensate fully. It adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it explains that 'docset_identifiers' are 'comma-separated' and sourced 'from list_installed_docsets', clarifies 'search_snippets' as 'whether to include snippets', and specifies 'max_results' range and default. This effectively documents all parameters.

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 tool's purpose: 'Search for documentation across docset identifiers and snippets.' It specifies the verb ('search') and resource ('documentation'), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'load_documentation_page' or 'list_installed_docsets' beyond mentioning docset identifiers come from the latter.

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 implies usage through the mention of 'docset identifiers (from list_installed_docsets)' and the parameter descriptions, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'load_documentation_page' or 'enable_docset_fts'. No exclusions or clear context for tool selection are provided.

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