Search Materio Resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint as false. The description adds that it searches PDFs, which is consistent but does not reveal additional behavioral traits beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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 well-structured with a clear intro, Args/Returns sections, and examples. It is somewhat lengthy but every sentence adds value, and the key purpose is front-loaded. Minor redundancy in the Args section (repeats schema).

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 simple search tool with no output schema, the description explicitly states the return format (list with semester, subject, category, topic name, CDN URL). Examples cover various use cases. No missing information for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the scope of search (fields), providing usage examples, and clarifying that multiple words narrow results. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 it searches across all Materio educational PDFs by keyword, specifying what it searches (semester numbers, subject names, categories, topics). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'list_resources' (listing without search) and 'fetch_pdf' (direct file retrieval).

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 via examples but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool compared to siblings. No alternatives are mentioned, and it lacks exclusions or conditions for use.

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