search_lsdyna_help

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it declares read-only behavior ('nothing is written'), explains the matching rule (all query words, case-insensitive), the ranking heuristic, the fact that hits include file name, title and excerpt, the limitation that integer values are absent, and that the help is an optional install component.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and tightly written for its density, but the trailing 'Args:' block repeats parameter material and the sentence about optional install components could be folded earlier. Minor redundancy rather than bloat.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still sketches hit structure, and it covers matching, ranking, path restrictions and the key limitation about integer values. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 and it does: it defines query semantics (all words must appear, case-insensitive), the max_results range (1-20), and help_dir's meaning, default resolution (installed release or LSDYNA_MCP_HELP_DIR) and the allowed-folder restriction.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search the LS-DYNA user guide (HTML help)') and gives a concrete use case ('find the options of a setting such as Hourglass Type'). It also implicitly separates itself from sibling get_analysis_settings by noting the help holds names, not stored integer values.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use context ('to find the options of a setting') and a follow-up path ('after setting a value, call get_analysis_settings'). It does not explicitly say when to prefer describe_keyword or build_keyword over this search, so the sibling routing is only partially covered.

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