docx_search_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It declares 'Read-only' and mentions return fields, but fails to disclose behaviors like whether search covers non-visible text, how regex/case sensitivity work, or any potential side effects. The disclosure is minimal.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it omits crucial details for a tool with 6 parameters and many siblings. The brevity compromises completeness, making it insufficient for effective agent use.

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 complexity (6 parameters, no output schema, many siblings), the description lacks details on return structure beyond field names, error handling, or how parameters affect behavior. It does not adequately differentiate from sibling tools or cover edge cases.

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 has 6 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter meaning, syntax, or constraints, leaving the agent entirely dependent on parameter names and defaults. There is no added value from the description.

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 visible paragraph text and returns specific fields (paraId, index, scope, hashes). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'search visible paragraph text' as opposed to reading all text or specific paragraphs.

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 for searching text in the document, but does not explicitly clarify when to use this tool over siblings like docx_read_paragraph or docx_extract_plain_text. No when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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