search_glossary

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions the resource location and bilingual functionality but does not disclose behavioral traits like idempotency, side effects, or access requirements. A search tool is likely read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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, front-loading the purpose in one sentence, then briefly documenting parameters. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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's simplicity (2 params, output schema present), the description provides essential context: purpose, resource location, language support, and parameters. It could mention return type or read-only nature, but is largely complete for a 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%, requiring the description to add meaning. It effectively explains both parameters: 'query' as a term/concept in French/English, and 'limit' as max results with default 5. This compensates for the lack of schema 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 clearly states the tool searches a glossary with 1878 term definitions, using a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like search_vault, but the context implies a focused glossary search, making it sufficiently clear.

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 (e.g., search_vault) or when not to use it. The description only states what it does, leaving usage decisions to the agent without explicit context.

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