search_titles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds value: explains it uses 'token-overlap match', returns handle-only output with specific fields, and clarifies no content reads or embeddings. No contradictions with annotations.

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 front-loaded with version identifier and core functionality. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and simple object type, description adequately covers input semantics, return structure, and behavioral constraints. Sibling tools are numerous but differentiation is clear.

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 67% (2 of 3 params have descriptions). Description does not add extra parameter information beyond what schema provides (e.g., max_results is not elaborated). No parameter details in description to enhance 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?

Description clearly states it is a 'fast title-only token-overlap match' and differentiates from sibling 'search_sections' (full hybrid retrieval). Specifies use case: 'for navigation: find the section whose heading text matches X'. Verb and resource are explicit.

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 contrasts with 'search_sections' and provides a clear 'when to use' scenario (navigation). Also describes limited output format, guiding agent to appropriate contexts.

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