openblocks_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the safety profile ("Solo lee" with the --read-only flag) and the environmental prerequisite (app installed but not necessarily open). It stops short of ordering, matching strictness, or any limits on result volume.

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?

One compact paragraph, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then scope, then the read-only caveat. The closing instruction to cite the page is short and actionable; nothing is padding.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be spelled out (it is anyway), and the read-only/prerequisite notes are valuable. However, for a 2-parameter search tool with zero schema descriptions, the missing `limit` semantics and matching behavior leave a real gap.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies what the query matches against (title, path and a content snippet), but the optional `limit` parameter (default 6), any maximum, and query syntax (substring vs. terms vs. language) are left entirely 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?

Uses a specific verb ("Busca") plus the resource ("páginas de OpenBlocks", the user's local Markdown vault app) and even states what comes back: pages matching title, path and a snippet. It is clearly distinct from generic search siblings, though it never names search_knowledge or lumina_search as the alternative.

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?

Gives useful context for use (read-only mode, the app only needs to be installed, not running) but never says when to prefer this over sibling searches such as search_knowledge, lumina_search or web_search. The agent must infer the routing decision.

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