keyword_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses search behavior, relevance sorting, and that missing files trigger download/parse. Does not explicitly state read-only nature, but it's clearly a query operation.

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?

Well-structured with sections (strategy, critical rules, args). Front-loaded with purpose. Slight redundancy: '1-5 keywords' appears in both rules and param description. Still efficient overall.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values aren't needed. Covers when to use, parameters, and behavior. Could mention that search is within a specific parsed announcement identified by local_key, but context is clear.

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%, but description adds full meaning: local_key as bundle key, keywords as 1-5 items (not sentences), match_mode default ANY, max_results default 5 max 50. Critical rules further clarify keyword usage.

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?

Clearly states it searches a parsed announcement by keywords and returns results sorted by relevance. Distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on search within an already-parsed announcement, as opposed to downloading, listing, or parsing tools.

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?

Provides explicit strategic guidance: directly invoke, do not pre-check file existence, prefer Chinese/English terms. Also gives critical rules on keyword count (1-5) and synonym expansion, and defaults for parameters.

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