search_documents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the search behavior (full text across content, title, metadata) but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination, or result format. The description is adequate but has gaps in behavioral context for a search tool.

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 is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a clear usage guideline. Both sentences earn their place by adding value, with no wasted words or redundancy, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (search operation with 1 parameter), no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides good contextual coverage. It explains the tool's purpose, usage, and parameter semantics, though it could benefit from more behavioral details like result format or limitations.

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?

The input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage. The description adds meaningful context by explaining that the 'query' parameter is for 'full text search' across multiple document aspects, which compensates well for the schema's lack of detail, though it doesn't specify query syntax or examples.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('full text search') and resources ('documents'), and explicitly distinguishes it from its sibling 'list_documents' by specifying it searches content, title, and metadata rather than general listing or field filtering.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('for searching document content, title, and metadata using a full text query') and when to use an alternative ('For general document listing or filtering by fields, use 'list_documents' instead'), clearly differentiating between search and listing operations.

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