Search in Vocabulary

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds behavioral details: case-insensitive regex keyword matching, default limit, language options, and return format (labels and optional notation codes). No contradictions.

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: a one-sentence summary, clear list of args, return info, usage guidance, and deprecation notice. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words.

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?

Covers all parameters, return values, and usage context. Differentiates from sibling browse_vocabulary. Lacks error handling or edge cases, but for a deprecated search tool it is sufficient.

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 75%; description adds meaning beyond schema: schemeUri comes from list_vocabularies, keyword is case-insensitive regex, limit is maximum results, lang values are explicitly listed. Adds useful context not in schema.

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 for concepts within a specific Controlled Vocabulary, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from browse_vocabulary by noting it is for quick keyword search in a known scheme.

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 provides when-to-use vs alternatives: 'use this only for a quick keyword search inside a scheme you already know', and recommends browse_vocabulary as a better default. Also marks the tool as deprecated, guiding agents away from it.

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