renforge_search_docsSearch Ren'Py offline documentation by keyword to retrieve relevant API references, guides, and scripting details for game development.
Search Ren'Py's offline documentation for a keyword.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state read-only safety, side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or pagination behavior; only the naturally implied local/offline nature of searching. Return values are covered by the output schema, but safety and operational behavior remain largely undisclosed.
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 sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the action and resource. Appropriately sized for a simple search tool.
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?
The tool is simple and has an output schema covering return values, so the description need not explain results. However, it lacks routing guidance versus sibling doc tools and does not fully compensate for the 0% parameter description coverage, leaving gaps for an agent selecting and invoking it.
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% for the single required parameter. The description says 'for a keyword', which loosely maps to the query parameter, but does not clarify format, whether multiple terms are allowed, or phrase versus single-keyword behavior.
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?
States a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Ren'Py's offline documentation'), with scope ('for a keyword'). Clear on its own, but does not distinguish from sibling tools like renforge_get_doc or renforge_list_docs.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as renforge_get_doc or renforge_list_docs, nor any stated prerequisites. The agent must infer that this is for discovering documentation rather than retrieving a specific known document.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.