search_gurbani

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the search targets English translations and returns lines with Gurmukhi text, transliteration, translation, author, and Ang reference. This provides useful behavioral context, though it does not mention potential limitations or edge cases.

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: the first states the core purpose with a verb and resource, the second provides examples and return fields. Every sentence contributes essential information without redundancy or padding.

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?

For a simple search tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently outlines what the tool does and what it returns. It lacks explicit details on result ordering or pagination, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity and the clarity of its return fields.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by giving concrete example queries ('get rid of ego', 'love for God'), which helps the agent formulate valid and effective queries beyond the schema's simple 'Search query' 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 Sri Guru Granth Sahib by concept or keyword, with specific examples. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that are focused on specific lookups (by Ang, line, etc.), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool (for searching by concept/keyword) and provides examples that clarify the intended use cases. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context from sibling tool names reinforces the differentiation.

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