Search Roku docs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it returns a path, title, and highlighted snippet, supports FTS5 syntax, and ranks results by relevance. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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?

Three focused sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then syntax details, then return format and follow-up tool. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description appropriately describes the return shape (path, title, snippet). It also covers search syntax and directs the agent to the proper next step. Combined with full schema documentation for params, the agent has everything needed to call this tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining query flexibility ('plain keywords as well as FTS5 syntax'), giving examples, and clarifying that results are relevance-ranked. This extra context helps an agent craft effective queries.

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 states a specific verb ('Full-text search'), a specific resource ('Roku/BrightScript documentation'), and the distinctive behavior ('ranked by relevance'). It clearly separates this tool from its siblings: get_roku_doc reads a full document, while search finds matches.

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 tells the agent to use get_roku_doc to read a result in full, providing a clear follow-up pathway. It does not explicitly contrast with list_roku_docs or state when not to use this tool, but the search-vs-browse distinction is implied by the wording.

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