search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It omits key behaviors such as pagination, response format, rate limits, or default sort/hits_per_page values. For a search tool, at least the return shape and pagination behavior should be mentioned.

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 two sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the primary action and then adds precise scope, making it highly efficient.

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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too thin. It explains the search scope but not what the response contains, how pagination works, or any sensible defaults. Thus, it falls short of being contextually complete for effective tool use.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for all 5 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds perspective on the enum values (sort by relevance/date, type story/comment/all) but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb+resource ('Search Hacker News using Algolia') and elaborates on searchable item types (stories, comments, all) and sort options (relevance, date), clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like list_stories or get_item.

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?

The description implies the tool is for searching, which is evident from the name, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or mention any exclusions. No guidance is provided on when to prefer this tool over list_stories or get_comments.

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