search

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

The description discloses that results are ranked best-match-first by a hybrid of keyword and semantic similarity, not necessarily indexing order, and that exceeding k returns all documents rather than raising an error. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations' read-only and idempotent hints, and explicitly states no side effects.

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 tight and front-loaded, with the primary purpose in the first clause, followed by a sibling alternative and key behavioral details. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or filler.

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 an output schema present and robust annotations, the description covers the tool's scope, alternatives, ranking behavior, and error handling. It provides all necessary context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly, making it complete.

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 provides clear descriptions for both parameters (query and k), covering 100% of them, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by explaining the edge-case behavior of k exceeding document count and elaborating on the hybrid matching logic for query, going slightly 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 clearly states the tool searches documents indexed via Index.add_files()/add_text() and explicitly distinguishes this from the agent's own memory. It names the specific resource and verb, and differentiates from the 'recall' sibling, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly instructs to use 'recall' instead for notes the agent chose to remember, providing a clear alternative for a different use case. It also establishes that this tool searches a reference knowledge base, giving the agent context for when to invoke it.

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