Search Colyseus documentation

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

The description discloses ranking behavior (weighted by title, headings, body) and that each hit includes a snippet. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it covers key behaviors but does not mention safety (e.g., read-only nature) or edge cases like no results.

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 extremely concise, with two sentences plus a list of examples. Every sentence serves a purpose: core function, behavior, and usage guidance. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: scope, ranking, snippets, and example queries. It lacks coverage of response details when no results, but overall is complete enough for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 both parameters described. The description adds value by explaining that multi-word queries match pages containing every term and providing examples of effective queries (e.g., 'reconnection', 'schema @type'), going beyond schema details.

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 it performs full-text search across all Colyseus documentation pages. It specifies the resource ('all Colyseus documentation pages') and the action ('search'), and distinguishes from siblings 'list_docs' and 'read_doc' by focusing on searching rather than listing or reading.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use the tool: 'Use this to find pages about a specific API, concept, or recipe' with relevant examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'list_docs' or 'read_doc', leaving some room for ambiguity.

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