Search Configured SkyBlock Wiki

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent, so the bar is lower. The description still adds meaningful behavior: the env-var dependency and fallback to retirement content, plus the caveat that results identify their source and are not assumed official. It omits pagination or result-shape detail, but the added context is substantive.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the two genuinely decision-relevant caveats. Nothing is padding.

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?

With no output schema, the description partially covers returns ('results identify their source'), and it handles the important edge case of missing configuration. Only the undocumented limit parameter and return shape keep it short of full completeness.

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 50% – the 'search' query is documented in the schema while 'limit' is not. The description adds no parameter meaning at all (no query syntax, no result-count behavior), so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 (Search) and resource (a configured MediaWiki source for SkyBlock knowledge), which clearly separates it from siblings like skyblock_wiki_page or skyblock_resource. It does not explicitly name the sibling it differs from, but the 'search a source' framing is distinctive enough.

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 real usage context: it explains the official wiki retirement and that without SKYBLOCK_WIKI_BASE the tool returns retirement information rather than results. However, it never states when to choose this over skyblock_wiki_page or other knowledge siblings, so the routing decision is left to inference.

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