jp_lit_search_kokusho_fulltext

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses: it doesn't retrieve full text/manifest/images, returns specific fields, depends on an external endpoint, and suggests verification. This covers key behavioral aspects, though cache behavior and rate limits are not mentioned.

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 concise sentences: the first conveys purpose and scope, the second adds a dependency note. No redundant words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 4 parameters, output schema presence, and many sibling tools, the description covers essential return fields and limitations. It could elaborate on when to prefer this over other search tools, but overall it provides adequate context for a search tool.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds only minor context ('searches transcription/OCR snippets or image tags') beyond the schema, which is insufficient to raise the baseline score of 3.

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 specifies the exact verb 'keyword search', the resource 'kokusho database transcription/OCR snippets', and clearly states what it returns (bid, コマ番号, スニペット, URL) and what it does not (full text, manifest, images). This distinguishes it from siblings like jp_lit_get_fulltext and jp_lit_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?

The description implicitly guides usage by stating it does not fetch full text/manifest/images, implying use for snippet-only searches. It also notes dependency on an external endpoint and advises final confirmation. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statements against alternative search tools.

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