pdf_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions returning page-numbered snippets, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, how it handles no matches, ordering behavior, or potential limitations. This is minimal transparency beyond the core function.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the structure of returned snippets (e.g., text and page number format), how results are ordered, or defaults for optional parameters. More context is needed for effective use.

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 100%, so the parameters are well-documented. The description adds little semantic value beyond the schema, merely implying that results are snippets with page numbers. This aligns with the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 'Search PDF text and return page-numbered snippets for each match' uses a specific verb (search) and resource (PDF text), and clarifies the output as page-numbered snippets. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_page_text (extracting full text) or pdf_reader (reading 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?

The description implies usage for text search within PDFs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as get_page_text or extract_tables. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are provided, so the guidance is only implied.

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