search_docs

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Discloses lib_id format requirement and rejection of version without lib_id, but lacks details on result behavior (e.g., pagination, rate limits, return structure). Adequate but incomplete.

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?

Three succinct sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no filler. Each sentence adds essential information without redundancy.

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 output schema exists (not shown), description covers inputs and constraints adequately. Lacks explanation of tokens parameter effect on output, but overall sufficient for a search tool.

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?

Adds significant meaning beyond input schema: provides lib_id format example (/hashicorp/terraform), explains version pinning, notes tokens default 5000/min 1000, and clarifies dependency of version on lib_id. Schema coverage is 100% but description enriches understanding.

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?

Clearly states the tool searches documentation snippets for a library, using specific verb 'Search' and resource 'documentation snippets'. Differentiates from sibling 'search_libraries' by focusing on docs rather than libraries.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use lib_id and version filters, and warns that 'version without lib_id is rejected'. Does not directly contrast with sibling tool but implications are clear.

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