search

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals the search mechanism (BM25), return formats, and empty-result behavior with retry advice. It does not discuss potential errors or limits, but for a read-only search tool it is reasonably transparent.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, usage guidance, return format, and empty-result handling are each covered without repetition. Structured with a clear opening and logical flow.

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 search tool with four parameters and an output schema, the description covers when to use, alternatives, return formats, and failure behavior. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 100% so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the 'detail' parameter modes and suggesting the use of 'tags' for category browsing, going beyond the schema's field 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 states a specific action: 'Find this server's Google Workspace tools by keyword (BM25 over names, descriptions, and tags).' It clearly identifies the resource and method, and differentiates from siblings by explicitly naming semantic_search, get_schema, and execute.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use when: you don't know the exact tool name yet' and gives alternatives: 'To browse by category use tags; once you have names, use get_schema for parameters, then execute to call them. To search past results rather than tools, use semantic_search.'

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