Full-Text Search Across Endpoints

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds critical context: it reads a bundled catalog with no network requests or rate-limit cost, and returns an empty array on no matches. This goes beyond annotations and clarifies operational behavior.

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 compact with every sentence adding value: purpose, usage, return format, edge case, and cost context. No 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?

Given the simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers behavior, return structure, alternatives, and caveats. Everything a caller needs to know is included.

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 detailed parameter description, but the description adds a useful tip that 'single keywords match more broadly than phrases,' enriching semantic understanding beyond schema alone.

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 all endpoint summaries, tags, and paths for a term and returns ranked matches. It uses specific verbs and resources, and explicitly contrasts with procore_discover_categories for browsing vs searching.

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?

It provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('when you already know roughly what you want') and when-not-to (use procore_discover_categories for browsing). It also advises retrying with broader terms before concluding absence, giving actionable alternatives.

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