Search Wiki Content

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the search action and target content, but omits details like case sensitivity, matching behavior, result ordering, or what happens with no matches. This is minimal and does not go beyond the schema.

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 a single concise sentence, but it is in Portuguese and adds no value beyond the schema. It is not overloaded, yet it also lacks useful context or differentiation, so it is acceptable but minimal.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain return format, errors, or how it differs from the very similar sibling 'search_documents'. This incompleteness could lead to incorrect usage or choice of the wrong tool, so more detail is needed.

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%, so the schema already documents both 'query' and 'limit' thoroughly. The description does not add any extra meaning about parameters; it only restates that it searches terms, which matches the schema's existing text. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 terms within wiki Markdown content, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'search_documents', which appears to have a nearly identical purpose, leaving ambiguity about which search tool to pick.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool rather than alternatives like 'search_documents', 'list_documents', or 'read_document'. The description only says what it does, not when to use it, so an agent gets no context for selection.

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