mek_fulltext_search

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 discloses the return structure (snippets, links) and behavior (full-text search), but does not mention side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. Still, it is adequate for a read-only search tool.

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?

Two sentences plus a return-type schema. Every sentence adds value, front-loaded with purpose and usage. 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 complexity (4 parameters, 1 required, output schema present), the description is complete: purpose, when-to-use, return format, and parameter guidance. Sibling tools are mentioned in usage guidelines.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds extra guidance: 'Use Hungarian words for Hungarian documents' for the query parameter, which adds value beyond the 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 'Free-text search in the full text of MEK documents' with a specific verb and resource, and contrasts it with metadata searches, distinguishing it from siblings like mek_simple_search and mek_advanced_search.

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 says 'Use this when the query concerns document CONTENT rather than catalogue metadata, or as a fallback when metadata searches find nothing.' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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