ps_corpus_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the retrieval algorithm (BM25, CJK-aware), which is useful, but says nothing about ranking, default result count, pagination, or whether config_path/periscope_path change what corpus is searched.

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?

A single tight sentence with no filler, and the core resource is front-loaded. It is efficient, though very slightly under-specified rather than verbose.

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 values need not be described, but with zero annotation coverage, 0% parameter documentation, and no usage guidance, the definition leaves too much for an agent to infer about scope, limits, and path parameters.

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% with 4 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It implies query is a full-text search string, but limit, config_path, and periscope_path receive no explanation in either the schema or the description.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Full-text search over every item ever collected') and adds implementation character (BM25, CJK-aware) that tells the agent what matching behavior to expect. The phrase 'every item ever collected' implies scope beyond the sibling ps_corpus_recent, but no sibling is named explicitly, so differentiation remains implicit.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named, despite several plausible siblings (ps_corpus_recent, ps_corpus_import, ps_filter_items, ps_fetch_items). An agent must guess whether to search here or pull recent items elsewhere.

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