ddb_search_rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds valuable context beyond that: it discloses the search covers both section names and full content, returns a list with slugs, and requires no login. This enriches the behavioral understanding without contradicting annotations.

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 three sentences long, with purpose stated first. Each sentence earns its place: scope, example, output format, sibling reference, and auth note. It is succinct and well-structured, with no fluff.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what it returns (list of matching sections with slugs), gives a concrete example, and notes login requirements. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 already documents the query parameter thoroughly with examples and the omit-to-list-all behavior. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 SRD rules sections by keyword, with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('SRD rules sections'). It also provides a detailed example ('grapple' finds Attacking and Conditions sections) and explicitly mentions ddb_get_rules for reading full text, distinguishing it from a sibling tool.

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?

It explicitly instructs to use ddb_get_rules to read the full text of a section, creating a clear alternative and implying this tool is for search/discovery. The example also clarifies when to use it. No exclusions are needed given the tool's specific scope.

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