search

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

The description only states 'Read-only,' implying no destructive actions, but lacks further behavioral details such as rate limits, pagination behavior, or what happens with broad queries. With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden and falls short.

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 short (6 words) but lacks structure and omits important information. It is not concise in a helpful way; it is under-specified.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. It provides no context for expected behavior, return format, or how parameters interact.

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 only 14% (only 'vault' has a description), and the tool description adds no parameter semantics. The many parameters (query, limit, path, format, case_sensitive, total) are left unexplained, making it hard for an agent to use correctly.

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 'Read-only Obsidian keyword search,' which identifies the verb (search), resource (Obsidian), and nature (read-only). This helps distinguish it from sibling tools like 'tags' or 'files' that have more specific scopes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'read', 'tags', or 'search_context'. The description lacks explicit context on appropriate use cases or when to avoid it.

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