Search Documents (Outline)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, which cover safety. The description adds behavioral specifics: results are ranked and include context snippets. No contradictions are present.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core functionality and lists filters. It is front-loaded with the primary action and result type, with no wasted words.

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 description covers the main behavior and optional filters. Given the annotations (read-only, idempotent) and schema (which includes pagination parameters), the description is adequate but could mention pagination (limit/offset) to be fully self-contained. No output schema is present, but the description implies the return of search results with snippets.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description lists the key optional filters (collectionId, statusFilter, dateFilter, userId) and explicitly provides allowed values for enums (e.g., draft/published/archived, day/week/month/year). It does not mention limit, offset, or query, but query is implied by 'full-text search'. This adds meaningful context 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 'Ranked full-text search with context snippets', specifying the verb (search), resource (documents), and the nature of results (ranked, with snippets). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like outline_list_documents (listing without search) and outline_get_document (single document retrieval).

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 implicitly indicates use for full-text search with optional filters, and the sibling tools provide context for alternatives. However, it lacks explicit 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' guidance, such as specifying that this tool is preferable to outline_list_documents when search is needed.

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