Search EQL Wiki

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

No annotations provided; the description discloses that results include an eraAdvisory because the wiki inherits data from later expansions. However, it omits details about read-only nature, rate limits, authentication requirements, or handling of empty results. The behavioral disclosure is partial.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words. Each sentence adds distinct value: the first states core purpose, the second provides a key behavioral note. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 no output schema or annotations, the description covers the search action and a specific output advisory, but does not describe the full response structure (e.g., result list, snippets, scores) or pagination. Adequate for a simple tool but not 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?

Schema coverage is 50% (only 'query' has a description). The description does not add parameter-level information beyond the schema. 'limit' lacks description both in schema and description. The description adds global context (full-text, eraAdvisory) but not parameter semantics.

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?

Explicitly states 'Full-text search the public EverQuest Legends MediaWiki.' Clearly identifies the action (search) and resource (MediaWiki), differentiating it from sibling tools like eql_wiki_page (specific page retrieval) and eql_wiki_category_pages (category listing).

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?

Does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. The description implies usage for full-text search, but lacks guidance on when not to use it or comparisons to siblings. The eraAdvisory note provides context but not decision logic.

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