stellaris-search

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read operations with open-ended data. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying that it 'returns matches as code snippets' and 'efficiently searches large files,' which helps the agent understand output format and performance characteristics without contradicting 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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with two concise sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and key capabilities ('search documentation' and 'return code snippets efficiently'). Every sentence adds value without redundancy or unnecessary details.

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 moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description is mostly complete. It covers the purpose, resource, and behavioral traits, but lacks details on output format beyond 'code snippets' (e.g., structure or examples). With annotations providing safety hints, it's adequate but could be slightly enhanced for full completeness.

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%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters (keyword, docType, contextLines). The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining parameter interactions or usage nuances, meeting the baseline score of 3 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 clearly states the specific action ('search documentation from the OldEnt/stellaris-triggers-modifiers-effects-list repository') and resource ('Stellaris latest version documentation'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like cwtools-config, stellaris-validate, and stellaris-version by focusing on keyword search rather than configuration, validation, or version checking.

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 context for when to use this tool ('search Stellaris documentation for keywords'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools. It implies usage for efficient searching of large files, which is helpful but not comprehensive.

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