Federated search across all Apple content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral detail — results are merged and ranked by relevance — but says nothing about pagination, the 40-result ceiling, or how ranking ties are resolved.

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 sentences, no filler, with the scope statement front-loaded and the merge/ranking behavior following immediately. Every clause carries information.

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?

For a read-only federated search with no output schema and a largely self-documenting parameter set, the description covers the essentials. It is slightly thin on result handling (pagination/limit) and on when to narrow the search, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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% and the terse enum values (session, doc, hig, evolution) are decoded by the description into WWDC sessions, Apple docs, HIG, and Swift Evolution, which is real added meaning beyond the schema. The limit parameter and the default type set remain undocumented in prose, keeping this below a 5.

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 (Search) and a precisely scoped resource (all indexed Apple content), then enumerates the four covered domains: WWDC sessions, Apple docs, HIG, and Swift Evolution. The word 'all' plus that enumeration clearly separates it from the many domain-specific siblings such as wwdc_search, apple_hig_search, and apple_doc_lookup.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'at once' and the broad scope; the description never says when to prefer this federated search over the narrower siblings, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. An agent can infer 'use this for cross-domain lookups' but gets no explicit routing rule.

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