Search NASA SciX help documentation for search syntax, features, API usage, and best practices to answer questions and guide astronomical literature searches.
Search SciX help documentation for information about search syntax, features, API usage, and best practices.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of results to return | |
| query | Yes | Natural language search query for documentation |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.0Input schema / $schemaAdded value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Input schema / properties / limit / descriptionPrevious value: -"Maximum number of results to return (1-20, default 5)"New value: +"Maximum number of results to return"Input schema / properties / limit / maximumAdded value: +20Input schema / properties / limit / minimumAdded value: +1Input schema / properties / limit / typePrevious value: -"number"New value: +"integer"Input schema / properties / query / descriptionPrevious value: -"Natural language search query (e.g., \"how to search by author\", \"export formats\", \"library permissions\")"New value: +"Natural language search query for documentation"Input schema / properties / query / maxLengthAdded value: +500Input schema / properties / query / minLengthAdded value: +1v1.0.14Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that — no note on result freshness, ranking, or whether an empty result is possible.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the resource and supported topics are stated immediately and nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.
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 simple two-parameter read-only search with no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It could have named the sibling `search` tool to prevent confusion, but no critical invocation detail is missing.
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%, with both `query` and `limit` documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about query phrasing or result count behavior beyond what the schema states.
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 names a specific verb (Search) and resource (SciX help documentation) and enumerates the content covered (search syntax, features, API usage, best practices). It is clear this targets docs rather than the sibling `search` tool, but it never explicitly states that distinction.
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?
Usage is only implied — an agent can infer it should call this when it needs documentation help, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling `search` tool as an alternative for actual paper retrieval.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.