Search Human Interface Guidelines

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds no behavioral context of its own: nothing about ranking, snippet content, truncation via limit, or the default markdown response.

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?

One tight sentence with the core scope front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though bordering on under-specified for a three-parameter tool.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should carry more of the burden, yet it omits return shape, result limits, and how results differ from apple_hig_list. For a search tool with sibling overlap and partial schema coverage, this is thin.

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 only 33% – just the 'format' enum has a description. The description's phrase 'keyword search' hints at query matching semantics but says nothing about the limit caps or what the query string accepts, so it only partially compensates for the undocumented 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?

States a specific verb (keyword search) and resource (HIG topics), scoped to components, patterns and platforms. An agent can tell it apart from apple_hig_list by the search semantics, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no exclusions. Nothing tells the agent when to prefer this over apple_hig_list, appstore_guidelines_search, or the broader apple_search_all, so the choice must be inferred from the name alone.

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