search_knowledge

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

States it is read-only with no side effects. Explains hybrid_alpha parameter behavior in detail. Describes that results are chunks not full content. With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden.

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?

Well-structured with summary, read-only note, Args block, returns, and usage guidelines. Every sentence adds value; no redundant or missing information. Approximately 150 words, appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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?

For a search tool with 4 parameters, hybrid alpha needing explanation, and output schema present, the description covers query language, parameter options, return type (chunks not full content), and usage guidance. Complete for agent decision-making.

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?

All four parameters are thoroughly described: query with usage tips (1–3 keywords recommended), max_results with default and max, category with explicit list and call to list_categories, hybrid_alpha with detailed behavior for different values. Schema coverage is 0%, so description compensates fully.

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 hybrid search combining semantic and BM25 keyword search with cross-encoder reranking. Distinguishes from siblings by noting it is the primary search tool, while search_similar is for reference documents and get_document is for exact filepaths.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (primary search tool for any topic or keyword lookup) and when not to (prefer search_similar or get_document for specific cases). Also suggests calling list_categories() first to see available categories.

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