explain_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the hybrid search behavior and the detailed return structure, including hit types and stats. Does not mention side effects but for a read-only tool this is sufficient.

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?

Well-structured with introduction, argument list, and return structure. Slightly verbose due to repeating parameter info that is in the schema, but still clear and concise overall.

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 presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, parameters, and output. Lacks error handling notes, but for a search tool this is adequate.

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?

Description provides detailed explanations for all 6 parameters (query, k, alpha, per_doc_limit, fts_topn, vec_topn), including defaults and ranges. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage entirely.

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 it explains search results by performing hybrid search and returning detailed breakdowns (FTS-only, vector-only, intersections). It distinguishes from siblings like search_hybrid by focusing on debugging and optimization.

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?

Explicitly states usage for debugging and optimizing search parameters. While it doesn't list when not to use, the context of sibling tools (e.g., search_hybrid) implies that for standard search without explanation, the sibling is appropriate.

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