search-bookmarks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only says 'search' without disclosing behavior like return format, pagination, read-only nature, or performance implications. This is insufficient for a search tool.

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 very short (one sentence), but it is not front-loaded with critical information and has a typo ('a specific a query'). While concise, it sacrifices clarity and completeness.

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 has no output schema and one parameter, the description should at least indicate the return type (e.g., list of bookmarks). It does not, leaving the agent uninformed about what to expect.

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% with detailed explanation of the query parameter, including qualifiers and examples. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond 'search', so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states it searches for bookmarks matching a query, which is clear. However, it could be more specific, e.g., full-text search across all bookmarks. The sibling tools include get-bookmark and get-bookmarks-in-list, so this tool's purpose is distinct, but the description doesn't explicitly differentiate.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. siblings like get-bookmark or get-bookmarks-in-list. It doesn't mention prerequisites or alternatives. The description simply states the purpose without context.

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