search_cli_docs

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool searches documentation but does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, rate limits, or output format. It adds minimal transparency beyond the obvious search operation.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second gives usage guidance and examples. Every sentence is informative with no fluff. Structure is front-loaded and efficient.

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 the tool has an output schema (not shown), the description need not explain return values. It adequately covers the search functionality and query examples. Could be slightly enhanced by mentioning the output type (e.g., 'returns documentation snippets'), but overall sufficient.

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 100% with a single 'query' parameter. The description adds value by providing specific examples of useful queries (e.g., 'how to push changes', 'branch environment variables'), which enriches the schema's basic description.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches Keboola CLI documentation for commands, flags, environment variables, and workflows. It provides concrete examples (sync, push, pull, etc.), making the purpose specific and differentiated from sibling tools which deal with mappings and branches.

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?

Description says 'Use this to find information about kbc commands...' and gives examples, providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, though sibling tools are unrelated to documentation search.

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