Search Local Arma Reforger Script API

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds no significant behavioral context. It does not mention search mechanics (e.g., case-sensitivity, indexing scope) or any side effects beyond what is implied by read-only.

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 a single English sentence (plus German translation), which is concise. However, the bilingual content is unnecessary for an agent, and the structure does not front-load key details beyond the basic action.

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 no output schema and no parameter description coverage, the description should at least hint at what the search returns (e.g., Doxygen page links, snippets). It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's output and usage expectations.

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 0%, but the description provides no additional meaning for 'query' or 'limit' beyond their names and schema constraints. The agent gains no insight into query format, matching behavior, or how limit affects results.

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 it searches 'the official Doxygen HTML installed with Arma Reforger Tools', specifying the resource and action. The title reinforces 'Search Local'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'search_official_docs', though the 'installed' phrase hints at local vs online.

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 versus alternatives like search_official_docs or search_workspace. No prerequisites or context are provided, leaving the agent without decision-support.

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