linda_search

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions returning a list with specific fields and pagination via skip, but does not address rate limits, authentication, or error states. The disclosure is sufficient for a read-only search but not exceptional.

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?

Two sentences: first explains the search and output, second explains pagination. No superfluous words, front-loaded with core purpose, and easily scannable.

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 no output schema, the description lists return fields (Titel, Beschreibung, Vorschau, Datum, Link) and pagination behavior. It covers essential context for a search tool, though it omits error handling and empty result detail.

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%, baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; the query example is identical, and pagination info is redundant. No extra context for parameter usage is provided.

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 'Durchsucht die Linde Datenbank (linda.lindeverlag.at) nach Dokumenten', specifying the verb (search) and resource (Linde database). It distinguishes from siblings like linda_get_document (single document) and linda_autocomplete (suggestions) by implying this is for full-text search.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like linda_get_document or linda_get_issue. The description focuses on functionality but lacks when-not or alternative suggestions, making it adequate but not explicit.

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