search_api

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: it explains that a live dump takes precedence over a bundled/versioned fallback index and that the `index` result field reveals which source is active, which matters for interpreting results.

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-loaded with the core action ('Search the API index'), then supporting detail. Mostly earns its space, though the parenthetical version string ('v258.4018') and cheatsheet reference are closer to trivia than actionable guidance.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description reasonably covers the important return detail (the `index` field) and the enumerable parameter. Safety is handled by annotations. Gaps around query syntax and limit behavior keep it from being fully complete for a 3-param search tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It usefully enumerates the `kind` values ('function', 'event', 'field', 'note'), which the schema lacks as an enum. However, it leaves `query` syntax and the meaning effect of `limit` (default 20) unexplained.

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 ('Search the API index') and describes the two data sources it draws from, which separates it from siblings like search_mod_code, search_guide, and game_data_query. It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative, but the resource is distinctive enough for an agent to route correctly.

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 implies usage (search the API index) and explains the data-source mechanics, but never states when to reach for this over game_data_query, find_examples, or list_events_usage. No explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives are given.

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