rx_kb_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, but the description adds real value beyond them: it clarifies the negative search scope (no full-text search) and the exact output line format (#Id title · areas · author · date). Only minor gaps remain, such as pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter.

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-loads what the tool does and its scope limit before routing guidance, with no filler. Slightly dense with output-format and cross-reference sentences, but every sentence earns its place.

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 usefully describes the returned line format and search field semantics, and covers when to use it versus siblings. A 6-parameter tool could still benefit from more on result ordering or empty-result behavior, but the essentials are present.

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%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema. The description lists the same searchable fields but adds no syntax, format, or matching semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (searching company KB articles) and enumerates the searchable fields (title, area, tag, author). It explicitly distinguishes itself from two siblings (rx_kb_article for text, rx_help_search for system docs), so an agent can route correctly without comparing schemas.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance with concrete query examples («как оформить командировку», «регламент закупок») and states the exclusion «По тексту статей не ищет». It also names the alternative tool for full-text retrieval and system docs.

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