unified_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the tool searches across two sources and returns ranked results, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination, or what happens when no results are found. For a search tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that are front-loaded and contain zero wasted words. Every sentence directly contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and usage.

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 has an output schema (which handles return values) but no annotations and poor parameter documentation in the description, the description is moderately complete. It covers the core purpose and positioning but lacks behavioral details needed for a search operation with multiple parameters.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the query parameter implicitly ('search'), but provides no information about the semantics of 'top_k', 'project', or 'doc_type' parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the bare schema.

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 ('search across', 'returns combined results') and resources ('indexed documents AND past memories'), and explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools ('search_documents + recall').

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 ('Use this instead of calling search_documents + recall separately'), clearly positioning it as an alternative to specific sibling tools.

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