docs_searchDocumentation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe read-only operation. The description adds that the search returns 'contextual content with titles and direct links,' which is valuable beyond annotations. It does not disclose potential limitations like pagination or result count, but for a search tool, the behavior is sufficiently transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds value. No extraneous information.

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 is a straightforward search with a single required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the return type, use cases, and ties to the documentation context (SDK Docs). It is complete for its purpose.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the single 'query' parameter. The description implies the query is the search term by stating 'search across the documentation.' While no format or constraints are given, the parameter is simple and the description adds meaning. Baseline is 3 for 0% coverage, but the description elevates it.

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 documentation for relevant information, code examples, API references, and guides. The verb 'search' and resource 'documentation' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like docs_getPage (which likely retrieves a specific page).

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'when you need to answer questions about Docs, find specific documentation, understand how features work, or locate implementation details.' It does not provide when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but the guidance is clear and helpful.

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