pandocs_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden; it clearly conveys a read-only search-and-return behavior and hints at ranked output. It does not specify result shape, ordering details, or potential limits beyond the schema's limit max, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 two short sentences that front-load the core function and then provide usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant detail.

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?

With four parameters and no output schema, the description gives enough context for a search tool: what it searches, what it returns, when to use it, and when to prefer siblings. It does not mention all sibling relationships, but that is not required for selecting this tool.

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?

The schema already describes all four parameters, and the descriptions are accurate and sufficient. The description adds overall context and query examples but does not significantly expand on parameter semantics beyond the 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Search'), a definite resource ('all ~580 Pan Docs sections'), and an output ('ranked snippets'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling exact-lookup tools by noting when those are preferable.

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?

It explicitly says the tool is 'Good for open questions' and gives concrete examples. It also tells the agent when not to use it: 'For a specific register or address, gb_lookup_register or gb_memory_map give an exact answer more cheaply.'

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