search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds value by stating 'Highlights are always enabled', which informs about a default behavior not evident from the schema. However, it lacks details on other critical aspects like permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format, leaving gaps in transparency for a 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?

The description is extremely concise with two sentences that directly convey the tool's function and a key behavioral trait. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and avoids any unnecessary words, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 complexity of a search tool with two parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema or annotations, the description is somewhat incomplete. It covers the basic action and a behavioral detail but omits information on return values, error cases, or integration with sibling tools, which could hinder the agent's ability to use it effectively in varied contexts.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('index' and 'queryBody') adequately. The description adds minimal semantics by implying the use of Elasticsearch query DSL but doesn't provide additional syntax, examples, or constraints beyond what the schema specifies, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('Perform an Elasticsearch search') and the resource ('with the provided query DSL'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_mappings' or 'list_indices', which would require mentioning that this tool executes actual search queries rather than retrieving metadata or listings.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_mappings' or 'list_indices'. It mentions that 'Highlights are always enabled', which hints at a behavioral trait but doesn't clarify usage contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without explicit direction.

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