govern_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Committed local index' usefully signals that results come from a pre-built index rather than live/local-uncommitted content, but there is no mention of authentication, result ordering, pagination, or freshness beyond that phrase.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is appropriate for a simple two-parameter search. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the tool is low-complexity. However, with zero annotation and zero parameter-documentation coverage, the definition leaves the query mechanics and result limits unexplained.

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 0% and the description says nothing about the two parameters. It never clarifies that 'text' is the query string or what 'limit' controls (e.g., max results), so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 resource (Govern pages), plus a scoping qualifier (committed local index) that separates it from siblings like search_catalog, bopa_search, stats_search, and tramits_search. It does not explicitly name an alternative, so it falls just short of the top band.

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 versus the other search siblings or govern_page. The only implied condition is the Govern domain, which the agent must infer from the tool name.

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