search-knowledge

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions semantics search and Qdrant storage, indicating a read-only retrieval operation, but it doesn't describe any side effects, result ordering, or limitations. The presence of an output schema covers return values, but additional behavioral context like 'results are ranked by relevance' would improve transparency.

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 long, front-loaded with the core action, and every word adds value. It wastes no space and is easy to parse.

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 the tool's relative simplicity, an output schema, and full schema coverage, the description is mostly complete. It lacks a bit of behavioral nuance (e.g., that results are semantically ranked and not exact matches), but it serves its purpose for an agent to understand invocation.

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 covers all parameter descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, though 'long-term knowledge base' hints at the collection context.

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 opens with 'Search for relevant information in the long-term knowledge base using semantic search,' which clearly identifies a specific verb (search), resource (long-term knowledge base), and method (semantic search). It distinguishes itself from siblings like store-knowledge and delete-knowledge by focusing on retrieval.

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 provides clear usage context with 'Use this to retrieve context, facts, or past interactions stored in Qdrant,' which indicates when to use the tool. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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