search_documentation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey behavior. It mentions searching for 'patterns, examples, and usage details' but does not describe pagination, search precision, or what happens with no results. The parameter schema covers some behavioral aspects, but the description adds limited insight beyond that.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first explains the core functionality, and the second provides actionable guidance. No redundant information is present.

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 five parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and usage advice. However, it lacks details on return format and how it integrates with siblings like 'explore_api'. The description is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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?

All five parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage). The tool description does not add any additional meaning or examples for the parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 project documentation and API references for patterns, examples, and usage details. It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('documentation'), and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'explore_api' and 'get_document_index' by focusing on targeted search.

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 advises to 'use early and often to stay aligned with current docs,' providing a clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or direct users to alternatives like 'explore_api' for browsing.

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