search_kcl_samples

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

Discloses case-insensitivity, default max_results, best-effort hint for multipleFiles, and error return as string. Without annotations, description carries full burden and does so well.

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?

Concise and well-structured: first sentence states purpose, followed by clear Args and Returns sections. No wasted text.

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?

Output schema defined in description with detailed field explanations and caveats. References sibling tools for more info. Complete for a search tool with ranking and multiple files.

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?

Args section fully explains both parameters (query case-insensitive, max_results default 5) compensating for 0% schema coverage. Adds clarity beyond input schema.

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?

Clearly states it searches KCL samples by keyword across titles and descriptions, returning ranked results. Differentiates from siblings list_kcl_samples (full caveat reference) and get_kcl_sample (mentioned for reliable answer).

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 explicit when/when-not usage guidance. Implies use for keyword searching vs listing all or getting a specific sample, but lacks direct instructions or alternatives.

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