search_govuk

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to mention any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, or read-only status. Minimal disclosure beyond the basic search action.

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 short at two lines plus an Args list, efficient and to the point. Every sentence serves a purpose, but it could be better structured with the purpose 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?

An output schema exists but is not visible; the description should compensate for the low schema coverage (0%). It omits important context like pagination, sorting, rate limits, and supported content types, making it incomplete for a search tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description adds basic meaning: 'query: Search query' and 'count: Number of results to return (default: 10)'. This is helpful but shallow, lacking details like query syntax or valid count range.

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 'Search gov.uk content for guidance, policy documents, and other government information', indicating a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like search_hansard or search_legislation, which also search government-related content.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling search tools, explicit usage context is missing.

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