search_docs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results are ranked pages carrying a page name for the get_doc_page handoff, which is useful, but says nothing about ranking semantics, result volume beyond the limit arg, or any access/rate constraints.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then usage, then a tidy args block. Slightly verbose with the multi-line example questions, but every line carries information the schema does not.

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, so return-value modeling is not required, and the description still adds the page-name handoff detail. Given a 4-parameter tool with zero schema description coverage, the prose covers the params adequately; only ranking/limit behavior nuance is absent.

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 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning, and it documents all four: query as free text with an example, library with its value set ('merlin' default or 'perceval'), limit as max pages, and version as an override defaulting to the upstream-published version. Minor gap: no value-set detail for version.

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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (documentation full text) plus the return shape (best-matching pages). It is clearly distinguished from the sibling search_api, which targets API docs rather than conceptual documentation.

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?

Explicitly says to 'use this first for conceptual questions' and gives sample query phrasings, then routes the agent onward: 'Each result gives a page name to pass to get_doc_page.' Both the when-to-use and the next step are stated.

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