search_bookmarks_fulltext

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states it uses FTS5 for searching page content. It does not disclose whether results include snippets, if the index must be pre-built, or other behavioral traits essential for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 a single sentence, concise and to the point. However, it could be slightly improved by front-loading the key differentiator (full-text search) and a brief usage scenario.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the tool returns, how filters combine, or the significance of 'content_only'. For a search tool, an agent needs more context to interpret results and use the tool effectively.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for only 'query' and implicitly for 'folder' and 'domain'. It omits explanation for 'limit', 'dbPath', and 'content_only'. The schema provides defaults, but the agent lacks clarity on how these parameters affect behavior.

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 the tool searches indexed bookmark page content using SQLite FTS5, specifying the resource and technology. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_bookmarks' (which likely searches titles/URLs) and 'search' (which is more general), aiding tool selection.

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 mentions optional folder/domain filters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_bookmarks' or 'search'. It provides implicit context for full-text search, but lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites or when not to use.

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