search_maya_docs

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the RAG technique, HyDE query expansion, and that results include relevance scores. It does not discuss side effects or rate limits, but such details are less critical for a search tool.

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 concise (four sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds distinct value (what, when, what covers, how). No fluff or repetition.

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 presence of an output schema and rich input schema, the description covers the tool's overall role, supported content, and advanced technique. Minor gaps (e.g., parameter details) are mitigated by the schema, so completeness is high 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% because the tool description does not mention parameters. Although the input schema itself provides detailed parameter descriptions, the low coverage means the description must compensate; it fails to do so, leaving the agent without higher-level parameter semantics from the free text.

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 Maya API documentation using hybrid RAG (semantic + BM25)' and lists covered domains (maya.cmds, PyMEL, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools that perform specific Maya actions by positioning itself as a preliminary research step.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Call this BEFORE writing complex Maya commands, using unfamiliar flags, or when unsure...' This helps the agent decide when to use it, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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