search_memory_alpha

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states what is searched, not how results are returned, whether it is read-only, pagination, or result ordering. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic search scope.

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, clear, and front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It effectively communicates the tool's purpose and scope in a concise manner.

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 tool has no annotations, no output schema, and the description is minimal. It does not explain what the search results look like, how to interpret them, or when to use the tool. For an agent to invoke it correctly, more context about return values and usage context is needed.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both 'query' and 'limit', including examples and constraints. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage is appropriate.

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's function with a specific verb ('Search'), resource ('Memory Alpha'), and scope ('Star Trek articles, characters, ships, episodes, and more'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_episode or get_starship, which target specific content types.

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 implies general search usage but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over more specific siblings (e.g., get_article, character_lookup). No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, so the context is only implicit.

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