Find Doc by Title

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable context: it reads workspace metadata (fast, no per-doc fetch), default case-sensitivity, and the use of `caseInsensitive` to fold case. These are behavioral traits not captured by 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 well-structured with the purpose first, then behavior, comparison, recommendation, and return shape. Every sentence provides useful information, though it is slightly longer than necessary given the output schema already exists.

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 simple parameter list, full schema coverage, an output schema, and thorough annotations, the description fully contextualizes the tool. It covers purpose, usage guidance, behavioral nuances, and return format, leaving no critical gaps.

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 meaning by explaining the default and max for `limit` (50/200) and the effect of `caseInsensitive` (folds case), going beyond the schema's basic 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 starts with 'Resolve docs by exact title,' using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this tool from `search_docs` by contrasting case-sensitivity and limit behavior.

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 states when to prefer this tool over `search_docs` ('Prefer this over `search_docs` when you know the exact title and want every match') and provides key differentiators like case sensitivity and limit caps.

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