search_template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions parameters but doesn't describe what the tool actually does behaviorally - whether it executes searches using templates, validates templates, or returns template results. There's no information about permissions needed, rate limits, side effects, or what happens when both 'id' and 'source' parameters are provided. The example shows a search execution but the description doesn't explicitly state this is a search execution 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 reasonably concise with clear sections for parameters and an example. However, the opening line '使用搜索模板' adds little value as a tautology. The structure is functional but not optimally front-loaded - the most important information (what the tool actually does) is missing entirely rather than being presented first.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and complex sibling relationships (multiple search and template tools), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the tool's purpose, when to use it, what it returns, or how it differs from 'search' or 'template_get'. The parameter explanations help but don't compensate for missing core contextual information needed for effective tool selection and use.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant value by listing all 4 parameters with brief explanations. It clarifies that 'index' is the index name, 'id' is for stored templates, 'source' is for inline templates, and 'params' are template parameters. The example further illustrates usage with 'id' and 'params'. This compensates well for the complete lack of schema descriptions.

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 '使用搜索模板' (use search template) is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name 'search_template' in Chinese. It doesn't specify what the tool actually does with templates - whether it executes them, validates them, or searches for them. While it mentions parameters, it doesn't articulate the core action or resource being manipulated.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With numerous sibling tools like 'search', 'search_simple', 'knn_search', and 'template_get', there's no indication of how this tool differs or when it's appropriate. The example shows usage but doesn't explain the context or prerequisites for using templates versus direct search queries.

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