open-context

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Fails to disclose what the search returns (titles, snippets, full content, IDs?), pagination behavior, result ranking, or empty result handling. 'Search' implies read-only operation but lacks specifics on the response structure.

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?

Single declarative sentence (9 words) is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the action. Zero fluff or redundant phrases, though brevity contributes to informational gaps in other dimensions.

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?

Lacks output schema and annotations. Given the tool's position among many specific documentation getters, the description should explain the return format (e.g., topic titles with URLs) and whether results are ranked or filtered, but provides no such context.

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 description coverage is 100%, providing detailed descriptions for both 'query' and 'language' parameters. The description offers no additional semantic context beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation for well-documented parameters.

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?

Clear verb ('Search') and resource ('documentation topics') with scope ('across all available documentation sources'). Implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'get_*_info' tools by targeting broad search rather than specific retrieval, though explicit differentiation from 'get_docs' or 'list_docs' is absent.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to select this tool versus the numerous specific 'open-context_get_*_info' siblings or versus 'open-context_get_docs'/'open-context_list_docs'. No mention of prerequisites or query syntax.

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