search_wiki

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that the tool performs a search across content and frontmatter and can filter by tag, which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly mention side effects, error behavior, or whether results are limited or paginated.

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 with no redundant wording. It front-loads the main purpose and appends the optional filter, making it easy to scan.

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?

The description covers the basic search behavior and optional tag filter, but it omits details about result ordering, limits, or exact matching. Since an output schema is indicated, return-value details may be available elsewhere, but the description lacks guidance on how this tool relates to the sibling tools.

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 description adds meaning beyond the bare schema by explaining that 'query' searches content/frontmatter and that 'tag' filters results. This clarifies both parameters, though it does not elaborate on expected formats or edge cases.

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 that the tool searches content and frontmatter across four specific directories and optionally filters by taxonomy tag. It is specific about the resource and action, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling tools read_orientation and get_page.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided about when to use search_wiki instead of the sibling tools. The verb 'searches' implies a different use case from reading a specific page, but the description does not state this or offer any alternative selection criteria.

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